i^ 


m 


-  <^ft'. 


^*^ 


DISCOURSE 

CONCERNING    THE 

C    H    U    R     C    H^^ 

IN    WHICH    THE 

SEVERAL  ACCEPTATIONS  of  the  WORD 

ARE    EXPLAINED    AND    DISTINGUISHED; 

THE   GOSPEL    COVENANT  delineated: 

A    RIGHT    OF 

ADMISSION  AND  ACCESS  to  SPECIAL  ORDINANCES, 

fN    TitEiR    OUTWARD    ADMINISTRATION    and 

INWARD    EFFICACY^ 

STATED    AND    DISCUSSED* 

DESIGNED    TO 
REMOVE  THE  SCRUPLES  and  RECONCILE 
THE    DIFFERENCES   of    CHRISTIANS. 

BY    MOSES     HEM  MEN  WAY,    D.  D, 

Pastor  of  a  Congregational  C^^uRCH  tn  Wells. 

**  Prfpare  the  way,  take  up  the  ftumbling  block  out  of  the  ^vay  ofrhv  ppople." 

Isaiah,  !vij.  j^. 


pr.iNrED  AT  i?osroN, 

By     I.THOMAS     amd     E.T.ANDREWS, 

Faujt's  Statuf,  No.  45,  Newbury  Street» 


CONTENTS, 


Page 


CHAPTER  T. 
Th^  CHURCFI  iypijiedhyihe  HEBREW  THE- 
OCRACY—Fom^J  by  the  NEW  COVE- 
^M^T— Different  ACCEPTATIONS  of  the 
of  the  WORD— D if erent  CHARACTERS 
md  PRIVILEGES  of  its  MEMBERS,  5 

CHAPTER    IL 
0/jhe   NEW  COVENANT. 

S&^.  I  .—rOf    the  Precepts  and   Penalties    of  the 

Covenant — Who  are  under  its  Bond,  10 

Se6l.  ri. — Of  its  Gra7its  and  Promifes — Vifible  and 
invifibk  Privileges — External  and  internal 
Adminijlrdtiony  12 

Scd,  HI. — All  in  Covenant  entitled  tofpedal  Priv^ 

lieges,       ^  ^  ij 

Se6l.  IV. — Comiexion  of  Covenant  Duties  and  Priv- 
ileges, _  ig 

Se£l.  V. — Of  the  Conditions  of  the  Covenant^  22 

Sed.  VI . — Ofvifuhle  and  invifhleSaintfiip,  26 

CHAPTER    IIL 
TheR\CyYlTS>and  PRIVILEGES 0/ CHURCH 

MEMBERS,  cxplaijicd  and  dijlinguifhed, 
Seft.L- — Ceinmunion. extern  aland  internal — full  and 
partial — pajfive  and  active — TtvofoldRight 
— Of  Admijfion  and  Acccfy  31 

^tCt,  I. I. — Rights  vifible  and  invifihle — Real  and 
Seeming — In  the  fight  of  Gcd,  in  ^ he  ac- 
count of  Men,  35 

CHAPTER    IV. 
Of  the    RIGIiT  of  ADMISSION    into    the 
CHURCH. 

'Seft.  I,— The  Right  of  Admiffion  diftinH  from  that 
of  Accefs — Belongs  to  vifible  Saints — Vfible 
Holincfs  a  real  Qualif  cation — External — 
Of  the  vftbilily  of  inward  Holincfs,  37 

SeQ.  II. — The  vfibiliiy  of  inward  Holincfs  and  the 

jvd g7r.cn t  of  C ha ritv further  conjidercd,         4.4. 


4  CONTENTS. 

Sea.  lU.—Vifibk  Saints  credible  Ptofejfors  of 
Chrijlianity — What  Projrjfion  is  credible — 
OJ  prof  effing  faving  Faith  and  Godlinefs,       52 

Sc6l.  IV. — U/pro/efftng  in  Moral  Sincerity — Wheth- 
er this  gives  a  Right  cj  Adviiffiun^  65 

Sea.  v.— Rule  of  Advrffion,  71 

C  H  A  P  T  E  R    V. 

Of  the  RIGHT  oj  COMI  NO  into  the  CHURCH. 

Sea.  J. — ThcRightof  Accefs  Explained — not  found* 
ed  in  the  reality  but  evidence  of  Grace  in  the 
view  of  Confcicnce — AjfurancCy  certain  ftgns  of 
Grace — Preponderant  Probahility^  and  pre^ 
vailing  Perfucfion  thereof  not  neceffary^  73 

^a.  IL— -All  zcho  can  prof  ejs  Chriflianily  unconfci^ 
ous  of  Hypocrify  or  RcfervCj  have  a  Right  of  Ac^ 
cefs — Confcious  Unbelievers  and  hnpenitents  may 
not  come — Profcffors  morally  fincere  have  cred^ 
ible  Evidence  of  f^ndifying  Grace,  80 

Sea.  III. — Whether  any  may  come  without  an  evident 

or  knozvn  Right,  86 

CHAPTER    VI. 
Pfthe  RIGHT  of  the  UNCONVERTED  to  the 
PRIVILEGESo/EXTERNAL  COMMUN- 
ION t^/,7?^7z  INSTITUTED  CHURCH. 

Sea.  I. — The  Queficn  explained  and  fated — Reaf- 

om  Jor  the  Affirmative,  9Q 

Sea.  11. — Txcclve  Objedions  anfwtred^  93 

Sta.  III. — Reconciling  Remarks,  106 

CHAPTER    VII. 
Of   a    COVENANT    RIGHT  to   a   DIVINE 
BLESSING   in    and  with  the-  OUTWARD 
USE  0/ ORDINANCES. 
Sea.  I. — A   Bltffng  promifcd   to   the   lighl   :fc  of 

Ordinances,  109 

Sea.  II. — Of  the  Sin  and  Danger  of  coining  unwor- 

tJtilv  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  1 11 

Sea.  III. — whether  the  Lord's  Supper  be  a  convert^ 

ing  Ordinance,  117 

oca.  IV. — 0bjepj-r:s  Crvficredy  iic) 


=^ 


DISCOURSE, 


CONCERNING    THE 


CHURCH.    &c. 


^— ^>5»^»^S>»<§>  <^^>  ©«<&--«<-' 


CHAP. 


I. 


r/z^  CHURCH  the  KINGDOM  of  GOD,  fypified 
by  the  HEBREW  COMMONWEALTH.— T^orwfi 
4);^/zeNEW  COVENANT.— Z)//oT;i.^  ACCEPT* 
ATIONS  0/  i^/^^  WOKT>.—Di]fcrent  CIIARAC 
TERS  and   PRIVILEGES  p/i^s  MEMBERS. 

TH  E  Church  is  a  heavenly  theocracys  or  kingdom  ofGocI, 
formed  by  tlie  new  covenant  ;  the  governitient  of  v.hich 
is  in  t!ie  hands  of  Chrirt,  who  is  in  a  fpecial  ienfe  King  of  Saints. 
And  the  new  ©ovenant  is  the  lule,  according  to  wiiich  this 
fpecial  government  of  the  people  of  God  is  adminiflered. 


The 


C^  *lhe  Churck  the  Kingdom  of  God^  ts'c. 

The  Hebrew  commonwealth  was  a  kingdom  of  God,  formed 
by  a  fpecial  covenant  which  he  made  with  that  people  when  he 
brought  them  out  of  Egypt.  Jehovah  was  their  Law-giver,  Judge 
and  King.  But  this  was  an  earthly  theocracy,  a  kingdom  of  this 
-world,  conflituted  and  governed  in  this  peculiar  manner,  that  it 
ir.i^-iit,  as  a  type,  rcprefent  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  gofpel 
church. 

As  all  who  vjcft  intercfted  In  the  Sinai  covenant,  which  was 
ratified  and  fealed  by  the  blood  of  facrifieed  beaP-s,  belonged  to 
tlic  commonwealth  of  Ifrael,  and  were  entitled  to  fome  at  leaft  of 
its  peculiar  privileges  ;  fo  all  who  are  interefled  in  the  new- 
4:oven::nt,  ratified  and  fealed  by  the  blood  of  Chrill,  belong 
to  the  kmgdom  of  heaven,  and  are  members  of  the  church  ot 
God. 

The  covenant  the^,  being  the  great  charter  and  law  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  contains  a  grant  or  promife  of  all  thofc  fpe- 
cial privilec;es  to  which  the  people  of  God  are  entitled,  and  pre- 
fcribcs  all  that  worfhip,  fervice  and  obedience,  which  they  are  to 
render  to  him.  And  all  who  are  in  the  covenant,  and  fo  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  are  under  fpecial  bonds  and  engagements  to 
comply  with  the  duties  prefcribed  to  them  ;  and  are  by  a  covenant 
grant  entitled  ro  peculiar  privileges.  But  fome  have  a  greater 
intereft  in  the  blcflmgs  of  the  covenant  than  others,  and  belong 
to  the  church  in  a  fpecial  and  more  importaot  fenfe. 

For  it  fs  to  be  obferved,  that  the  church  is  a  word,  which  In 
fcripturc,  and  by  the  common  ufage  of  chrifiians,  bears  fe vera! 
diflfcrcnt  fcnfes,  which  fliould  be  carefully  noticed,  expbincd  and 
nifiinguinied  ;  otherwifewc  (hall  be  in  danger  of  great  confufion 
r.nd  mifiakc  in  our  conceptiois  and  difcourfef.  Thefc  various 
r.cccptations,  I  Hiall  now  rndeavour  to  flatc  and  define,  (o  tar  as 
iniy  be  needful  to  our  prcTLnt  defign. 

I.  The  Cathdick  cr  IJ'i'rjcrfal  Churih^  taltu  in  tts  large fl  accept ■ 
/jtiof,  includes  or  comprehends  all  who  arc  in  any  rcfpcH  intercAed 
in  t?K.'  covenant,  fo  as  to  he  under  its  bonds,  and  entitled  to  any 
l»ofpcl  privilege  either  cx'tcrnril  or  internal,  to  which  others,  who 
are  not  in  covenant,  have  no  right.  All  who  belong  to  tlic  cliuroli 
in  any  of  thofc  more  fpc«ial  acceptations  v.hich  are  to  be  mention- 
ed ahd  explained,  however  different  in  their  charadier  and  quali- 

ficatioos, 


ihe  Church  the  Kingdom  of  God,  Gfr.  7 

iications,  and  in  the  privileges  to  which  they  are  intltled,  are 
comprehended  in  this  univerjai  church  above  defined,  which  ccn- 
fequently  can  be  but  ooe.     But 

IT.  Sometimes  we  are  to  underftand  by  the  church,  the  v:loU 
colle5iive  body  of  true  faints^  who  Ihall  finally  be  admitted  to  the 
bleflednefs  of  the  heavenly  ftate.  This  is  commonly  termed  ths 
invifible  churchy  and  by  the  Apoftle  the  body  0}  Chrijl  ;  which  in 
its  largeft  acceptation  comprehends  all  who  fhall  have  an  inJieri- 
tance  in  the  kingdom  of  glory  j  many  of  whom  may  not  yet  be 
adual  members,  but  only  in  the  foreknowledge  and  purp'ofe  of 
God.  But  in  a  ftriifter  lenfe,  the  invifible  or  myftical  church  is 
that  part  of  the  myftical  body  of  Chrift  which  is  adually  formed  ; 
coniifting  of  thofe  who  are  now  the  children  of  God  by  regene- 
ration and  fpecial  adoption.  Of  thefe  fome  are  glorified  faints, 
who  are  termed  the  church  triumphant.  Some  ai'e  faints  con- 
fli£ting  with  their  enemies  on  earth,  who  are  the  church  militant. 
This  collective  body  conftitutes  the  univsrfal  invifible  church  y  and 
being  univerfal  it  can  be  but  one.  It  is  calkd  invifible,  not  only 
becaufe  a  great  part  of  them  being  perfe£led  fpirits,  are  removed 
from  human  fight,  but  alfo  becaufe  though  members  of  tire 
church  militant  are  vifible  in  their  perfons,  yet  thofe  fpecial  qua- 
hfications  and  privileges  by  which  they  are  efTentially  difcriminat- 
ed  from  all  others,  cannot  be  feen  or  known  by  men  ;  afid  aJfo 
by  way  of  coptradiftindion  from  the  vifble  church  ;  which 
is  a 

in.  Thifd  acceptation  of  the  term,  the  import  of  which  I3 
liext  to  be  confidered.  For  it  is  to  be  obferved  that  the  kingdotra 
of  heaven  makes  an  appearance  on  earth,  in  perfons  and  focieties 
profefilng  the  chriftian  religion,  obferving  its  outward  ordinances, 
and  exhibiting  in  their  lives  its  proper  effe(5ts.  And  the  v;hoIc 
colle6livd  body  of  profefied  and  viiible  chriftians,  together  with 
their  children,  are  confidered  as  conftituting  one  univerfal  vifibU 
church.  Indeed  I  do  not  conceive  that  the  v^hole  number  of 
vifible  faints  are,  by  a  diij^ne  ordinance,  formed  into  one  confociat- 
ed  body.  I  find  no  gofpel  rule  or  warrant  for  organizing,  and 
admrnifiering  a  general  government  over  the  whole,  to  which  all 
pahicular  focieties  and  perfons  profeifing  the  chrifiian  reliiJ;ion 
are  bound  to  be  fuhjea  ;  or  that  any  general  olBcers  arc  suTho- 
riaed  by  Chrill  for  any  fuch  purpofe.  In  this  fenfe  we  admit 
not  the  notion  of  a  univerfal  vifible  church,  formed  by  divine  in- 

llitutio!: ; 


8  Thf  0}ur:h  the  Kingdom  of  Goi^  l^c. 

flilution  ;  but  as  a  general  denomination,  by  wbich  profefled 
chriftians,  collcHrvcly  conlidered,  m^y  be  dirtinguifhed  trom  the 
reft  of  mankind,  we  readily  admit  it.  All  who  creJibly  protefs 
chrifti.anity  are  to  be  confidercd  as  belonging  to  the  houftiold  of 
faith  :  as  holy  brethren,  pariakers  of  the  heavenly  calling.  And 
lome  fpccial  aCls  of  brotherly  fellowfhip  feem  to  be  due  to  them  ; 
though  for  want  of  a  convenient  opportunity,  or  for  other  weighty 
reafons,  they  may  not  have  joined  or  confederated  with  any  par- 
ticu^r  chrilfian  focicty.  There  fcems  to  be  foine  brotherly  rela- 
tion between  all  who  profefs  t!vj  common  faith.  And  fo  all  fuch 
may  be  confidcrtd  as  compoling  one  vyillc  church  ;  which,  though 
not  properly  an  organized  body,  yet  the  feveral  members  are  to 
niaintain  fome  external  chrilban  communion  with  each  other. 
But  tiiere  is  alfo — 

IV.  The  in/iitutcd churchy  vih'xzh  is  plainly  dlAinguIfhable  from 
The  vifible  univerfal  church,  of  which  we  have  fpoken.  An  in- 
f^ituted  church  is  a  vifible  fociety  of  profefled  chriftians  (includ- 
ing their  children)  formed  according  to  the  ruJes  of  the  gofpel, 
by  ihe  mutual  confederation  of  the  feveral  members,  either  cx- 
picf:;  or  at  leaft  implicit,  for  the  purpofe  of  obferving  the  ordi- 
nances of  vv'orft-iip  and  difcipline  whicii  Chrift  bus  inftituted  for 
the  edification  of  the  whole  body  and  the  feveral  members,  and 
that  the  light  of  the  gofpel  might  be  held  up  to  the  world  by  a 
public  profefilon  of  faith  and  obedience,  by  the  reading  and 
preaching  of  the  word  j  and  that  its  proper  influence  and  efPedls 
mi^2;ht  be  manilefted  and  exemplified  in  the  chriftian  and  orderly 
converfation  of  the  members  in  their  feveral  places.  Whether 
there  be  any  rule  or  wairant  in  the  gofpel  for  forming  clafiical, 
provincial,  or  rational  churches,  by  a  coaicfcence  of  feveral  parti- 
cular congregations,  1  fiial!  not  now  enquire.  But  fuch  focieties 
of  profelTefl  chriiVians  as  tliofe  above  defcribed,  are  contefTcdly  of 
divine  inftltution  ;  and  in  the  New  Teftament  are  commonly 
tenncd  churclies.  y\nd  their  form,  order,  ofticers,  ordinances  and 
adminiftrat'.ons  are  prcfcribcd  in  the  gofpel.  An  inftituted  church 
is  a  part  of  the  vifihl''  church  inrj:rl:l.  it  is  the  kingdom  of  hea- 
ven on  earth,  rcprefcniing  the  heavenly  theocracy  in  the  place 
v;here  it  is  formc«l.  And  though  chriftians  as  members  of  ci^il 
focieties  arc  lo  be  fabjcv5l  to  t!)e  lawful  authority  therein  eftablifti- 
ed,  yet  as  mcnibtrs  ot  a  church  they  arc  to  call  no  man  mailer  on 
canh,  but  acknowledge  Chrift  alone  as  their  Lord  and  Law- 
giver. 

V.     r.uf 


Definition  of  the  Church,  9 

V.  But  as  the  rTiCmbers  of  inftituted  churches  are  nni  all  fit  to  be 
admitted  to,  or  ule  the  privileges  of  full  communion,  this  has 
occafioned  a  yet  more  limited  and  fpecial  meaning  of  the  word  : 
and  thofe  members  who  are  in  full  communion  are  termed  tke 
churchy  in  diliinttion  from  thofe  who  are  not  communicants. 
And  i\\\s  fifth  acceptation  of  the  word  is  not  only  common  with 
us,  but  is  thought  to  be  authorifcd  by  the  Apofiles  ;  who  in  their 
cpiftles  to  churches  addrefs  them  as  thofe  whom  they  fuppoi- 
ed  to  have  been  communicants  at  the  Lord's  fupper,  and  give 
them  direflions  for  a  due  attendance  on  that  ordinance.  But 
many  who  are  members  of  a  church  in  a  larger  fcnfe,  are  not 
members  of  the  communicating  church  ;  nor  are  to  be  admitted  to 
the  Lord's  table  without  further  qualifications.         Again, 

VL  By  the  church  is  fometimes  meant  thofe  who  have  a  part 
in  the  cxercife  of  church  authority,  a  power  of  voting  in  the 
eledion,  difmiflion,  or  depofition  of  officers,  in  admitting,  ccnfur- 
ing,  or  refloring  members,  and  in  other  church  a6ts.  Thofe  who 
hold  the  keys  of  government  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  may  be 
called,  for  diftindtion,  the  reprefentative  church  ;  there  are  great 
difputes  in  whofe  hands  this  authority  is  lodged,  and  to  whom  it 
properly  belongs,  to  exercife  it.  But  all  agree  that  not  every 
member  is  to  be  admitted  to  the  privilege  of  voting.  When 
Chrift  directs  his  difciples,  in  cafe  an  offending  brother  will  not 
hearken  to  more  private  admonition,  to  tell  it  to  the  church,  he 
feems  to  mean  the  reprefentative  church,  who  only  have  a  right 
publickly  and  authoritatively  to  judge  and  ccnfure  offenders.  For 
to  what  purpofe  would  it  be  to  carry  a  complaint  to  anv  but  thofe 
who  had  authority  to  take  cognizance  of,  and  redrefs  the  grieve- 
ance  ? 

From  the  account  which  has  been  given  of  the  church,  and 
the  feveral  acceptations  in  which  the  word  is  ufcd,  it  appears  that 
perfons  of  very  different  characters  and  defcriptions  are  members. 
Some  are  departed  fpirits.  Some  are  inhabitants  ot  this  world  ; 
and  of  thefe  fome  are  infnnts  ;  fome  are  adult  perfons,  and  of 
botli  fexes  ;  fome  are  profeffcrs  of  chridianity,  others  have  not 
yet  made  a  profelTion  oi  their  faith  :  And  of  profcffing  chridians, 
ibme  are  true  faints,  and  belong  boiii  to  the  invilible  and  vifible 
church  J  others  are  only  credible  prcfcllbrs  ;  who  though  regu- 
lar members  of  the  vifiblc  church,  are  not  living  members  of 
ChrilVs  myliical  body.  And  of  thofe  who  belong  to  the  vifible 
church  in  its  largefi:  acceptation,  fome  are  not,  and  fome  are  form- 
ed into  inftitured  churches.  Some  are,  and  fome  are  not  confirm- 
ed members,  and  in  full  communion.  Other  differences  miglit 
be  mentioned.  But  however,  they  are  all  AibjeiSls  of  the  kmg- 
dojn    of  heaven,  member'  of  the  church,  intercHed  in  the  new 

B  covenant, 


JO  Of  the  Niiv  Covenant, 

covenant,  entitled  to  peculiar  privileges.  They  are  all  (in  fome 
fenfc)  holy  pcrfons,  the  children  and  people  of  God  ;  and  have 
feme  union  or  relation  to  Chrill  the  h^ad  of  the  church,  whichk 
thofc  who  arc  out  ot  the  church  and  covenant  have  not. 


CHAP.       11. 

0/  //;^  N  E  W  C  O  V  E  N  A  N  T, 

THE  new  covenant  is  a  divine  and  gracious  conftitution  ref- 
pcvSting  fallen  man,  founded  in  the  mediation  of  Chrifl:, 
and  adminilkred  by  him,  according  to  which  the  church  is  form- 
ed, and  governed.  It  contains  a  law,  or  rule  of  duty  and  obedi- 
ence, inforced  by  penalties  ;  and  alfo  a  grant  of  fpecial  privileges  ; 
and  et"lablifiies  a  mutual  relation  and  connection  between  the  du- 
ties preferibed  and  the  privileges  granted  to  thofe  who  arc  there- 
in intereltcd  or  concerned. 

SECTION     I. 

Of  the  preceptive   part  of  the  Covenant, 

THE  preceptive  part  of  the  Covenant  contains  all  the  laws  of 
Chrill,  requiring  all  exercifes  or  avSts  of  piety  towards  God,  of 
ri^hteoufncfs  and  benevolence  towards  men  ;  which  are  enjoined 
in  the  moral  law.  in  addition  to  thefe  it  prefcribcs  what  arc  call- 
ed evangelical  duties,  repentance  towards  God  on  gofpel  princi- 
ples, faith  in  Chriil,  doing  all  in  his  name,  with  a  due  regard  to 
him  in  all  his  nK^diatorii.l  offi-ces,  and  for  thofe  fpecial  ends  and 
purpofes  for  which  he  requires  our  obedience  ;  with  dcpcndance 
on  his  grace  to  alllfl  our  endeavours,  and  his  merit  and  intcr- 
cerr.i;n  to  recommend  us  and  our  pcrtbrmances  to  the  divine  ac- 
cei'tancc.  It  requires  alfo  an  obff.*rvance  of  all  outward  ordinances 
of  gofpel  worlliip,  and  an  attendance  on  the  inllitutcd  means  or 
inlh-umcntnl  duties  of  religion. 

'I'lwfc  lav;s  of  Chrifl,  are  enforced  with  penalties :  which  are 
of  two  kinds,  corrct^iive  or  vindicTtive.  The  former  are  fatherly 
chaiVifcmcnts,  with  which  x\\q  children  of  God  are  vifitcd  by  him 
fur  their  refcrmation   and    prulir,    v^hcn    they  tranfgrefs,   and 

violate 


Of  the  New     Covenant,  I  r 

violate  their  covenant  bonds  and  engagements.  In  this  cafe  they 
are  threatned  that  their  iniquity  fhall  be  vifited  with  the  rod. 
God  tellities  his  difpleafure  by  hiding  his  face  from  them,  fuf- 
pending  the  comforting  influences  of  his  fpirit,  expofing  them 
to  (hame,  fubjeaing  th^em  to  the  rod  of  church  difcipline,  and 
alfo  vifiting  them  with  fore  outward  afflidions.  In  fuch  ways 
he  chaH-ens  them  for  tranfgrelfmg  the  covenant,  though  he  takes 
not  his  loving  kindnefs  from  them. 

But  there  are  much  more  awful  and  vindictive  judgments 
threatned  againll  thofe  who  rejecft  the  covenant,  and  break  its 
bonds  in  fuch  a  manner  as  to  cut  themfelves  off  from  an  inter- 
eft  in  its  blellings,  that  God  will  avenge  the  quarrel  of  his  cove- 
nant, not  only  by  deftrudllve  outward  judgments,  but  by  giving 
them  up  to  a  blind  deluded  mind,  a  reprobate  confciencc,  a  hard 
heart ;  that  the  external  privileges  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
ihall  be  taken  from  them  ;  and  that  in  the  world  to  come  they 
fliall  be  puniOied  for  all  their  fins,  and  particularly  for  rcjecling  or 
perlidioufly  breaking  covenant,  by  a  fentence  of  final  excom- 
munication from  the  congregation  of  the  faints,  and  fuffering 
the  pains  of  the  fecond  death  with  hypocrites  and  unbelievers. 

If  it  be  enquired,  who  are  bound  to  obey  the  precepts  of  the 
gofpel  covenant,  and  whether  all  fuch  may  be  faid  to  be  in  ccve^ 
nant  and  U7ider  its  hands  ? 

I  anfwer,  all  to  whom  the  covenant  is  prcpcfcd  are  required  and 
bound  to  confent  to  it,  accept  of  it,  voluntarily  come  under  its 
bonds,  and  fo  perform  the  covenant  duties  therein  prefcribed.  It 
has  the  authority  of  a  divine  law,  and  needs  not  our  confent  to 
give  it  a  binding  force.  Some  precepts  of  the  gofpel  are  imme- 
diately directed  to  all  to  whom  the  call  of  the  gofpel  is  fent,  znd. 
demand  prefent  obedience.  But  ethers  are  immediately  direded 
to  thofe  who  are  in  or  under  the  fpecial  bond  of  the  covenant, 
und  cannot  be  regularly  obeyed  by  any  but  thofe  who  are  firft 
admitted  into  the  number  of  God's  people,  by  a  reftipulaticn  or 
confent. 

The  call  of  the  gofpel  requires  all  who  arc  favoured  with  it  to 
give  a  ferious  attention  to  its  propcfal,  to  receive  the  divine  tefti- 
mony  on  thofe  fufficient  evidences  with  which  it  is  confirmed, 
and  cordially  confent  to  the  gracious  covenant  which  it  reveals 
and  offers  to  the  children  of  men.  When  they  have  tlius  taken 
the  bond  of  the  covenant  on  them,  there  are  further  duties  im- 
mediately injoined  ;  duties  which  belong  not  to  thofe  who  arc 
not  in  covenant  while  fuch,  particularly  ufing  the  fpecial  ordi- 
nances, which  are  appropriated  exclufively  to  the  church.  Brief- 
ly then,  though  the  propofals  of  the  covenant  are  of  Important 
concernment  to  all  mankind,  efpecially  to  thofe,  who  have  offers 


12  Of  the  Nsz'j  Coz'enant. 

of  divine  grace  made  to  them,  yet  a  rejected  tender  of  the  cove- 
nant does  not  give  one  an  intereft  in  it.  And  though  the  call 
of  the  gofpel  lays  a  bond  of  duly  on  all  to  whom  it  is  fent,  yet 
toe  h/iJ  of  the  covenant^  as  the  exprefTion  is  commonly  underftood, 
projx'ily  lies  only  on  thofe  who  have  Come  under  vows  or  engage- 
ments of  obedience,  either  by  their  own  pcrfonal  act,  or  by  the  rerti- 
pulation  of  thofc  who  ure  authorlfed  to  a6t  for  them.  When  thofe 
who  are  not  uiuler  covenant  bonds  difobcy  the  call  cf  the  gofpel 
to  them,  requiring  their  confcnt  to  its  propofal,  they  are  guilty  of 
refiifing  the  covenant.  But  when  thofe  who  are  under  covenant 
bonds  violate  them,  they  are  guilty  of  perfuliouHy  breaking  the 
covenant.     A  circumQance  which  inhances  their  difohedience. 

To  riniHi  this  fc.lion.  The  gofpel  contains  precepts  which 
::re  imir.cdintely  directed  to,  and  binding  upon  the  confcience  of 
tliofc  who  nre  not  in  c  jvenant,  even  all  to  whom  the  v;ord  of  faith 
is  fent.  But  it  has  alfo  precepts  which  prcfcribe  fpecial  duties  to 
tliofe  who  are  in  co/enant,  who  are  under  fpecial  obligations  to 
perforin  thefe  and  all  other  covenant  duties.  And  this  fpecial  ob- 
jigation  arifing  from  their  fpecial  relation  and  engagements  to 
God,  is,  I  concelvej  what  is  to  be  undcrflood  by  the  bond  of  the 
covenant. 

SECTION     II. 

Of  ihc  Grants  or  Frsjnifes  of  the  Covenant,      hi  vifihle  and  invfihk 
Privileges,     Its  external  and  internal  Jdminijlration, 

AS  the  ehrilTian  law  contains  our  whole  duty,  fo  all  the  blef- 
fings  we  need  are  contained  in  the  covenant,  grant  and  promife 
to  the  people  of  God.  There  arc  blefHngs  pertaining  to  the  life 
which  now  is,  and  that  which  is  to  come.  Without  attempting 
to  give  a  detail  of  particulars,  let  it  fuffice  to  fay,  the  bleflmgs, 
granted  to  the  church  by  the  covenant,  are  partly  invifiblc  gifts 
which  are  connected  with,  and  iffue  in  the  falvation  of  thofe  who 
receive  them  j  fuch  as  a  faving  union  to  Chri(t,  pardon  of  fin, 
reconciliation  to  God,  and  reception  into  the  number  of  his  chil- 
dren by  regeneration  and  adoption,  the  gift  of  the  holy  Spirit  to 
abide  with  them  as  a  vital  principle,  by  whofe  influence  they  arc 
endowed  with  the  graces  of  fanclilication,  and  made  mete  to  be 
partakers  of  the  inheritance  of  the  faints.  All  who  receive  thcfc 
gifts  and  blelfmgs  of  the  covenant  arc  true  faints^  members  of  the 
invifiblc  church,  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  of  glory.  But  there 
»rc  alf<>  outward  and  vifible  blefTmgs,  of  which  the  new  covenant 
cotitaiiis  a  grant  or  promife.  Such  arc  the  common  gifts  of  Prov- 

♦  vidcncc; 


Of  the  New  Covenant.  xj 

idencc,  anJ  cfpeclally  fpiritual  privileges,  the  word  of  God,  the 
outward  ordinances  and  inftituted  means  of  religion. 

But  the  great  quedion  with  fome  is,  who  have  a  right  to  thefe 
external  privileges^  the  grant  of  which  is  contained  in  the  covenant  ? 
and  vvhether  they  belong  to  all  true  faints,  or  to  them  only — To 
which  I  would  fay,  that  the  new  covenant,  I  conceive,  contains 
no  grant  or  promife  claimable  by  any  one  till  he  is  iirfl:  in  and 
under  it. 

But  yet  many  who  are  not  in  covenant,  have  a  lawful  and  good 
Tight  not  only  to  receive,  pofTefs  and  ufe  the  common  blcflings  of 
Providence,  but  alfo  fome  of  thofe  fpiritual  privileges  which  the 
covenant  promifes  and  grants  to  the  church.  Tho  outward 
means  of  converfion,  the  ordinances  appointed  for  this  purpofe, 
and  a  fpecial  blefling  to  render  them  effedual,  are  covenant  blef- 
fmgs,  promifed  and  granted  to  the  church  :  Nor  have  any  who 
are  not  of  the  church  a  cove7iant-right  to  them  ;  that  is,  they  have 
no  right  arifing  from  or  founded  in  a  covenant  grant  or  promife 
to  them.  But  yet  God  in  fovsreign,  unproniifcd  bounty,  grants 
thefe  outward  bleflings  and  fpiritual  privileges  to  many  who  arc 
not  in  covenant ;  yea,  and  grants  a  fpecial  bleihng  with  them, 
whereby  they  become  the  efFeitual  means  of  bringing  them  into 
the  church  and  covenant.  When  the  call  of  the  gofpel  is  fent 
to  thofe  who  are  without,  it  is  not  only  their  right  but  duty  to 
attend  on  thofe  ordinances,  whether  public  or  private,  which  are 
the  ordinary  means  of  converfion  ;  fuch  as  the  reading  and  hear- 
ing of  the  word,  and  prayer.  And  churches  of  the  faints,  in  which 
thefe  ordinances  are  ftatedly  adminiflered,  fhould  admit  all  who 
defne  in  an  orderly  manner  to  attend  on  the  means  of  inilruaion. 
But  it  is  the  church  only  to  whom  thefe  ordinances  are  granted  by 
covenant.  God  has  not  promifed  this  privilege  to  any  others  ; 
or  that  he  will  continue  it  another  day  ;  or  tl^at  the  means  of 
grace  fliall  be  blefled  for  the  faving  good  of  thofe  to  whom,  in 
uncovenanted  favour,  they  are  vouchfafed.  The  means  of  con- 
verfion ?nay  be  granted  to  thofe  who  are  not  in  covenant.  But 
the  church  does  and/W/  enjoy  tJie  ordinances.  7'hey  are  a  part 
of  its  inheritance,  fecured  by  a  covenant  grant.  The  oracles  of 
God  are  committed  to  them  :  They  are  the  keepers  of  them. 
They  are  the  candlcflicks  in  which  the  light  of  the  gofpel  is  fct 
up,  whence  it  Ihines  abroad  in  the  world.  It  is  in  the  churcli 
alone  that  the  ordinances  appointed  for  the  converfion  of  unbe- 
lievers, as  well  as  thofe  which  are  to  be  ufcd  only  by  the  people 
of  God,  are  flatedly  adminiflered.  And  as  thefe  outward  means 
may  be  granted  to  thofe  without,  fo  they  may  be,  and  we  have 
reafon  to  think  ufually  are  bleffcd  for  faving  good  to  fome  wherev^ 
er  tlvey  are  fent^  though  thj3  fpecial  bklFing  is  an  uncovenanted 

favor 


t4  Of  the  New  Covenant, 

favor  to  thofe  who  are  not  of  the  church.  But  there  are  prom- 
ifcs  that  the  means  of  converfion  fhall  be  blcffcd  to  tliofe  who  arc 
in  the  covenant ;  that  God  will  circuincife  their  heart,  and  the 
heart  of  their  feed  to  love  him  :  That  he  will  give  them  a  new 
lienrt,  take  away  the  heart  of  ftone,  and  give  them  a  heart  of  tiefh  : 
That  he  will  write  his  laws  in  their  minds  and  Iicarts  :  That  he 
will  pour  his  fpirit  on  their  feed,  and  his  bicfling  on  their  off- 
fpring. — Converting  grnce  is  a  covenant  blclhng  to  thofe  who  arc 
in  the  covenant.  And  the  converfion  of  fuch  regular  church 
members  as  may  be  unconverted  (and  no  doubt  there  may  be 
many  fuch  among  the  children  of  the  covenant)  is  the  fulfilment 
of  a  gracious  promife  to  the  churcli,  whereby  an  uninterrupted 
fuccclfion  is  preferved  therein^  chiefly  of  the  natural  branches, 
who  are  born  members.  The  promife  indeed  being  indefinite, 
cannot  be  abfolutely  claimed  for  himfelf  by  any  one  in  particular; 
but  it  fhall  have  its  accompli(hment  within  the  church  :  It  fecures 
a  blelftng  to  them.  And  hence  we  find  Ephraim  pleading  his 
covenant  relation  to  God  in  prayer  for  converting  grace.  'Turn 
tiioLi  me  and  I  (liall  be  turned,  for  thou  art  the  Lord  my  God. 

So  that  they  who  are  of  the  church  have  much  the  advantage 
of  others.  Thofe  invifible  blefiings  of  divine  grace,  pardon,  re- 
conciliation to  God,  fan6tification,  which  are  connected  with 
eternal  falvation,  belong  only  to  thofe  who  are  in  the  covenant. 
They  can  no  otherwife  be  obtained  by  any  than  by  admilfion 
into  the  number  of  God's  peculiar  people,  according  to  the  terms 
or  rules  ci  the  gofpel.  There  are  alfo  external  privileges,  to 
which  none  but  thofe  who  are  in  covenant  and  of  the  church 
may  be  admitted.  There  are  fpecial  ordinances,  which  others 
have  no  right  to  ufc,  and  may  not  be  admitted  to  them.  And 
though  the  common  means  of  converfion  are  not  fo  confined  to 
the  churcli,  but  that  they  arc  alfo  in  uncovenantcd  bounty  grant- 
ed to  many  others  ;  and  though  the  fpecial  blefiings  of  grace  are 
often  conveyed  to  fuch  in  the  ufe  of  thefe  means,  as  has  been 
faid  ;  yet  even  th  jfe  common  means  of  converfion  are  more  ef- 
pecially  the  privilege  of  the  church  :  To  them  only  are  they 
granted  and  fecurcd  by  covenant.  It  is  in  the  church  that  thcfc 
ordinances  are  ordinarily  and  rtatedly  ufcd  and  enjoyed  :  They  arc 
efpecially  defii:r"C(l  for  the  benefit  of  its  members,  and  the  prom- 
ife of  a  fpecial  bleffing  to  rer.der  thcfc  means  effcvftual  is  to  them. 

liut  we  arc  not  to  conceive  that  all  who  are  in  the  covenant, 
and  rightful  members  of  the  church,  according  to  the  gofpel  rule, 
are  entitled  to  all  the  fame  or  cqvial  privileges.  Some  have  a 
much  greater  intercft,  a  richer  and  more  valuable  inheritance  of 
fpirirual  blclfings  conveyed  or  promifed  to  them  than  others.  All 
a.'-c  entitled  to  feme  fpecial  favors  and  advantages  above  the  reft 

of 


Of    the  Isfeiir  Covenant,  t% 

of  the  world.     And  even  thofe  privileges  in  which  tfiofe  who  are 

not  in  covenant  arc  allowed  to  (liare  with  them,  the  church  holds 
by  a  fpecial  and  firmer  tenure,  even  a  covenant  grant  or  promire. 
But  fome  are  entitled  to,  and  endowed  with  more  ample  and  im- 
portant privileges  than  others.     For  inftance. 

Every  true  faint  is  undoubtedly  interefted  in  the  covenant ; 
ai  member  of  Chrift's  myftical  body  ;  a  partaker  of  thofe  bleffings 
of  divine  gr.ace  which  (hall  iflue  in  his  eternal  falvation.  But  if 
he  has  not,  ©r  exhibits  not  fuch  evidence  of  godlinefs  as  the  gofpel 
rule  makes  neee/Tary  to  give  one  a  right  of  admiflion  and  accefs 
to  the  privileges  of  outward  communion  in  an  inftitutcd  church, 
he  has  not  then  a  covenant  right,  nor  can  regularly  or  warranta- 
bly  come,  or  be  admitted  to  them. 

Again,  the  minor  child  of  a  regular  member  of  an  inftituted 
church  is  confefTedly  in  covenant,  a  member  of  the  church,  and 
according  to  the  gofpel  rule  is  a  proper  fubjed  of  baptifm,  with 
other  fpecial  privileges  :  Yet  we  have  no  reafon  to  think  that  all 
fuch  children  are  the  fubjedts  of  fpiritual  regeneration,  or  entitled 
to  the  promife  of  eternal  life.  And  however  we  may  hope  charita- 
bly concerning  individuals,  yet  they  may  not  be  admitted  to  full 
communion  till  they  appear  to  be  regularly  qualified  for  it ;  tho' 
their  right  of  memberfhip  remains,  till  according  to  gofpel  rule 
they  are  cut  oflF  and  uncovenanted. 

As  every  true  faint  is  not  entitled,  according  to  the  rule  of  the 
gofpel,  to  the  external  privileges  which  belong  to  regular  mem- 
bers of  infiituted  churches  ;  fo  the  members  of  inftituted  churches 
are  not  all  entitled  to  the  peculiar  privileges  of  true  faints.  Nor 
is  there  a  neceflary  connexion,  or  implication  of  the  refpedtive 
qualifications,  or  privileges  which  according  to  the  covenant  belong 
to  each  refpeclively*  Tho'  all  covenant  bleffings,  external  and  in- 
ternal, are  granted  or  promifed  to  the  church,  yet  every  member  is 
not  entitled  to  all.  There  are  fpecial  privilegeswhich  belong  only  ta 
the  members  of  inliitured  vifible  churches  as  fuch.  There  are 
other  gofpel  bleffings  which  belong  only  to  the  invifible  or  myfti- 
cal  church.  Though  every  true  faint  is  in  covenant,  and  of  the 
church ;  yet  many  fuch  belong  not  to  any  vifible  inftituted 
church  ;  and  fo  have  no  right  to  ufe  the  fpecial  ordinances  which 
are  appropriated  to  vifible  faints.  And  though  every  vifible  faint 
is  in  covenant,  and  has  a  right  to  fpecial  external  privileges  ;  yet 
many  fuch  are  not  true  faints^  and  fo  belong  not  to  the  invifible 
church  of  true  faints,  nor  are  entitled  to  thofe  fpecial  and  im.por- 
tant  benefits  which  are  granted  or  promifed  to  fuch  alone. 

The  evangelical   charter,  which  forms  the  church,  contains 
fevcral  articles  or  branches.     Some  of  tiie  privileges  it  grants  are 
outward  and  vifible ;  others  arc  inward  and  invifible.  The  form- 
er 


10  Of  the  New  Covenant* 

cr  are  annexed  to  outward  and  vifible,  the  latter  to  Inward  and 
invifible  qualifications.  And  hence,  though  the  church  in  its 
general  acceptation  is  but  one,  yet  it  is  divided  into  feveral  branch- 
es or  clafTcs,  each  of  which  is  diftinguifhed  by  pecuHar  charaiSler- 
iR'ic  denominations,  and  has  peculiar  and  appropriate  privilege* 
granted  to  the  members  of  wiiich  it  is  compofed.  The  vifiblc 
inllitutcd  church  is  diftinguifl^ed  by  outward  vifiblc  qualifications, 
has  an  interert  in  the  covenant,  in  refpeJt  of  its  cutivard  admhiif. 
tratioKy  and  a  grant  of  outward  blcHings  and  privileges.  71ic 
invifible  or  myl\ical  church  is  diflinguifhed  by  inward  invifi- 
ble qualifications,  has  a  more  important  interefl  in  the  cove- 
nant in  refpect  of  its  inward  and  invifible  adminijiration^  and  has  a 
grant  of  inward  and  invifible  blefTings.  It  is  however  to  be  not- 
ed, that  the  invifible  and  vifible  church  arc  not  wholly  diverfe  in 
refpefl  of  the  members  of  which  they  are  compofed,  though  in 
rcfpe6t  of  their  defcriptive  formal  charaficrs,  they  are  diflinff-. 
For  the  invifible  and  vifible  church  mutually  include  each  other 
in  part :  many  being  at  the  fame  time  both  inward  and  vifible 
faints ;  and  intercfled  both  in  the  internal  and  external  blcfTings 
of  the  covenant.  But  there  are,  bcfides,  many  regular  church 
members  who  arc  not  inward  faints,  and  fo  not  entitled  to  thofc 
bleflings  which  are  granted  peculiarly  to  the  myftical  church. 
And  there  is  yet  a  third  clafs  confining  of  inward,  but  not  vifiblc 
faints,  who  arc  entitled  only  to  interna!,  but  not  to  external  cov- 
enant blcffings. 

Thofe  divines  whio  fpeak  of  an  outward  and  inward  covenant 
are  not  to  be  underflood  as  fuggefling  the  idea  that  there  are  two 
dilliniSl  covenants  of  grace  propofed  to  mankind.  Kut  the  gofpel 
covenant  contains  a  grant,  promife,  or  propofal  of  outward  and 
inward  bleffings.  It  contains  a  rule  for  the  adminiftration  of  a 
vifible  and  invifible  government  over  the  church  and  its  members. 
If  we  fpeak  of  the  myflical  church  confif^ing  only  of  true  faints, 
this  is  an  invifible  fociety  ;  fince  fan(ftifying  grace,  which  is  the 
cficntial  dif^inguifhing  qualification  of  all  its  members,  cannot  be 
certainly  fcen  by  men.  Now  the  gofpel  covenant  contains  grants 
and  promlfcs  of  fpiritual  blcifings  to  them  ;  but  thcfe  blcffings 
arc  alfo  invifible:  no  man  can  certainly  know,  whether  another 
has  rcceiveii  them  ;  and  even  they  who  arc  partakers  of  them 
are  often  doubtful  of  their  own  intereft  tlierein.  J]ut  Chr;(t, 
who  knows  them  that  arc  his,  adminilters  an  invifible  govcrn- 
mcnt  over  his  faints  according  to  the  rule  of  the  covenant,  and 
(lifixMircs  the  promifed  bleirings  of  his  grace  to  all  w!io  linvc  a 
title  to  them. 

iiut  vifible  inHituted  churches  are  focieties  which  may  be  fccn, 
and  diftuiguilhed  from  ill  others  by  outward  marks,  and  appa- 
rent 


Of  the  jN'ew  Covendnh  tf 

rent  quallficatiorts.  Tliough  it  cannot  be  known  Vvho  are  in- 
wardly fanvS^ified,  yet  it  may  be  known  in  whom  thofe  evidences 
of  fantSlification  appear,  which  the  gofpel  rnle  requires  to  qualify 
for  external  communion.  And  the  gofpel  covenant  contains  rules 
and  ordinances  for  the  adminiflratlon  of  an  external  government 
in  and  over  vifible  churches.  According  to  this  rule,  vifible  faints' 
who  have,  and  exhibit  the  figns,  expreHlons  and  evidences  of 
faith  and  repentance,  which  the  gofpel  requires  as  a  qualification 
for  the  privileges  of  external  communion:  Perfons  of  this  def- 
criptionj  I  fay,  with  their  children,  are  regular  and  rightful 
church  members ;  and  it  is  their  duty  and  right  to  ufe  thofe  or- 
dinances and  privileges  of  inftituted  churches  to  which  others, 
not  church  members,  have  no  right ;  what  thefe  evidences  are  ia 
particular  may  be  confidcrcd  in  its  proper  place.  But  in  general 
we  may  fay  that  certain  evidences  of  inward  fanclification  are  not 
neceffary,  but  fallible  figns  are  fufficient,  to  give  one  a  right  of 
admifTion,  and  accefs  to  thefe  privileges. 

The  fum  of  what  has  been  faid  is ;  the  privileges  granted  by 
the  covenant  are  either  internal  or  external ;  fome  of  which  arcS 
in  uncovenanted  goodnefs  vouchfafcd  to  fuch  as  are  not  in  cove- 
nant ;  who  have  then  a  lawful  right  to  pofiefs  and  improve  them. 
But  the  church  alone  has  a  covenant  right  to,  or  grant  of  any  of 
them  :  And  fome  fpecial  privileges  belong  only  to  rightful  mem- 
bers.—-Not  every  one  v/ho  has  an'intereft  in  the  covenant  is  enti^ 
tied  to  all  its  bleillngs*  They  are  divided  to  each  feverally,  ac- 
cording to  the  different  qualifications  of  each  one,  and  according 
to  the  intereft  he  has  in  the  covenant. — There  is  an  invifible  and 
a  vifible  government  in  and  over  the  church,  adminiftered  accord- 
ing to  the  gofpel  covenant,  which  grants  and  affign?  invifible 
hleflings  to  true  faints,  and  external  privileges  to  vif.ble  faints  : 
The  former  being  in  the  covenant  in  refpect  of  its  internal,  th€ 
the  latter,  in  refpect  of  its  external  adminiflratlon. 


SECTION    nt. 

^11  in  Covenant  entitled  to  Jhccial  Privilege:^ 

SOME  have  fuppofed  tliat  perforts  may  be  in  covenant  and 
yet  have  no  riglit  to  any  of  its  privileges.  They  may  be  under 
Its  bonds,  but  not  be  conformed  to  them,  and  fo  not  be  fubjs(5ts 
of  the  condition. — Now,  conformity  to  the  terms  of  t!ie  cove- 
nant, it  is  faid,  is  the  thing  whicli  givcii  light  to  allits  bene- 
fits ^  and  not  merely  a  being  under  ties  to  that  conformity.  Pri- 
C  vileges 


1^  Of  the  Niw  Ca-vcnaht, 

vileges  are  not  ar.ncxcd  merely  to  ou'igatlons,  but  to  compliance 
with  obligations. 

But  I  conceive  tliat  all  who  arc  in  covenant,  in  any  proper 
fcnfc,  are  not  only  under  its  bonds,  but  inverted  with  its  privi- 
leges. Tlui  covenant  Forms  the  church.  All  who  are  interef^.ed 
in  the  one  are  rightful  members  of  the  other.  And  furely  right- 
ful churcii  members  have  a  covenant  right  to  fome  fpecial  privi- 
Jeges  above  others. 

It  is  true,  fome  wlio  arc  not  in  covenant,  and  fo  have  no  cov- 
enant right  to  any  of  its  blefring^,  may  by  means  of  it  be  laid 
urider  the  ties  oi  duty  to  confent  and  conform  to  it.  This  is 
the  cafe  of  all  the  hearers  of  the  gofpcl :  And  by  having  the  cov- 
enant propofed  to  them,  they  are  admitted  to  have  and  ufe  fome 
valuable  privileges.  But  the  obligations  they  are* under  arc  not 
the  bond  of  the  covenant^  nor  are  they  entitled  to  any  privileges  by 
a  covenant  grant  till  they  become  members  of  the  church.  But 
fuch  bonds  of  duty  as  fuppofe  men  to  be  in  covenant,  have  privi- 
leges annexed  to  them  :  For  an  interell  in  the  covenant  gives  a 
right  to  privileges,  as  f|6on  as  it  lays  one  under  its  bonds  ;  and 
this  right  is  abfolute,  and  not  fufpended  on  future  conditions* 
It  is  impofTible  for  any  one  to  be  in  the  covenant  till  he  has  the 
qualifications  necelTary  in  order  to  his  having  an  intereft  in  it. 
AntI  thcle  oualifications  are  all  the  condition  or  conformity  to  the 
<:ovenant,  neccffary  to  give  one  a  right  to  fome  privileges.  But 
it  does  not  follow,  that  becaufe  a  man  is  in  covenant,  and  fo  en- 
titled to  fome  of  its  blelhngs,  he  is  therefore  entitled  to  aJl  of 
them.  Many  of  its  grants,  and  thofe  of  the  higheft  importance, 
may  iVill  lemain  fufpended  on  conditions  which  have  not  yet 
been  complied  with  by  fome  who,  yet  according  to  the  gcfpcl 
rule,  are  righttul  members  of  the  church.  And  though  fuch  arc 
under  covenant  bonds  to  comply  with  thefe  further  duties  or  con- 
tiitions,  yet  thefe  bonds  neither  give  them  a  right  to  thofe  further 
hlciRngs,  promifcd  on  il.efe  conditions,  nor  is  a  right  thereto 
any  way  annexed  to  them:  For  conditional  grants  are  not  claim- 
able by  thofe  who  polTefs  not  the  condition.  I  am  not  now  en- 
quiring who  are  rightfully  jn  covenant,  and  of  the  church,  and 
what  ([ualiricaiions  are  rccjuired  to  conftitute  one  a  regular  mem- 
ber, jjut  that  a  right  of  church  meniberlhip,  and  a  title  to  fpe- 
eiii!  privileges,  belongs  to  all  who  are  in  any  proper  fenle  in  cov- 
enant, methinks  no  intelligent  chriOian,  who  maturely  ccnfiders 
the  matter,  can  or  will  call  in  qucHion. 

Whenever  any  by  their  fcandnlcus  wickedncfs  impenitently 
perfilled  ii),  lofc  ll'.cir  right  to  all  covenant  privileges,  ihcy  are 
\\a  longer  in  the  covenant,  however  the  ties  of  duty  which  they 
haJ  tuken  on  tlicmfeivcs  may  yet  l>€  binding  on  them.  To  fpeak 

of 


Of  the  New  CovcJiani,  1 9 

«f  thofe  as  being  In  covennnt  in  fome  fenfe,  who  nre  by  the  gof- 
Xrd  rule  utterly  cut  off  and  uncovenanted,  is  fuch  a  tieparture 
from  the  received  acceptation  of  tiie  pbifafe  as  is  not  to  be  admit- 
ted. At  this  rate  we  might  fay  tliat  the  damned  in  hell  are  in 
covenant,  and  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Nor  is  it  to 
be  doubted  but  that  Korah,  and  rhofe  who  lived  in  openidolatiy, 
were,  fo  long  as  they  had  an  inLcrell  in  the  covenant,  entitled  to 
fome  of  its  fpecial  privileges. 

Upon  the  whole,  merely  a  conditional  grant  of  covenant 
bleffmgs  gives  no  one  an  intereH  in  the  covenant,  as  the  phrafe  is 
always  underftood.  Such  a  conditional  grant  is  made  to  all  men  ; 
and  it  is  a  matter  of  great  concernment  to  all  ;  and  is  an  cxpref- 
fion  of  the  mercy  of  God  to  the  world.  In  confequence  of  this, 
all  may  be  considered  as  in  a  falveable  fiate.  And  we  are  to  love 
them,  to  hope  and  pray,  and  ufe  mecins  tliat  they  may  come  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  be  h\'zd.  And  many  blellings 
are  daily  bellowed  on  them  ;  yet  we  are  not  to  imagine  that  all 
are  in  covenant :  Nor  does  a  propofal  or  offer  of  thif>  conditional 
grant,  enforced  with  a  divine  command,  requiring  men  to  con- 
fent  to  and  comply  with  it,  give  men  an  intereft  in  the  covenant. 
This  indeed  brings  tiie  blcfhngs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  near 
to  them,  and  even  puts  them  in  aclual  poficffion  of  fome  valuable 
external  privileges  granted  to  the  church,  viz.  the  word  of  God, 
2nd  the  outward  means  of  faith.  The  preceptive  part  of  the 
covenant  then  reaches,  and  takes  hold  of,  and  binds  them  to  obe- 
dience ;  yet  all  the  hearers  of  the  gofpcl,  are  not  in  the  covenant. 
This  is  the  peculiar  privilege  of  the  church  and  its  members. 
And  though  all  of  thefe  have  not  a  title  to  all  covenant  bleifrngs, 
yet  they  have  a  prefent  and  abfolute  title  granted  to  them,  in  and 
by  the  covenant  to  fome  of  its  privileges,  even  fuch  as  none  but 
the  church  can  have  a  regular  accefs  to. 


SECTION    IV. 

The  Connexion  bciiuecn  Covenant  huUes  arid  Privileges* 

I  SHALL  now  offer  feme  obfcrvations  on  the  connexion,  re*- 
lation,  and  dependance  which  the  duties  and  privileges  of  the  cov- 
enant have  the  one  on  the  other.  The  right  underflanding 
of  this  Teems  to  be  neecfiary  to  our  having  a  jull  view  oi  the  gof- 
pel  confti'tution. 

Indeed    . 


20  Of  the  New  Covenant, 

Indeed  the  duties  and  privileges  of  the  covenant  canmjt  be  per-* 
feclly  diflinguilhoci  from  each  other.     For  though  there  are  many 
blclllngs  v^'hich  are  no^  duties,  yet  all  duties  arc  bicfTingv.     They 
^re  bellowed  upon   and  wrought  ih  us,  as  well  as  done  by  us. 
Moral  acts  or  qualifications  are  eiTc61s  which  may  be  referred  to 
the  fupreiiie  and  fubordinate  agent  ;   and  fo  may  at  the  fame  time 
t>c  inlUnces  and  exprefllons  of  fj)e^ial  divine  favour,  and  alfo  of 
obedience  in   the  fubjecl:  to  the  will  of  God.     It  is  the  doctrine 
of  fcripture  that  the  tirft  and  fccond  caufe  co-operate  in  and  to- 
wards  the  fame   effects.     Every  good   gift  is  from  God,  who 
worketh  in  us  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleafure.     There  is 
nothing  good  in  us  which  we  have  not  received  from  him.     By 
his  grace  we  are  what  we  are.     Faith  is  his  gift.     And  yet  it  is 
Ifis  commandment  that  we  believe  in  the  name  of  his  Sen.   Chrifl 
4S  exalted  to  give  repentance.     At  the  fame  time  he  commands 
aH  men  every  where  to  repent.     Ail  covenant  duties,  as  ctiedts  of 
divine  grace  according  to  the  promife,  are  alfo  covenant  blt^fllngs. 
Bi^t  with  refpccf  to  thefe  duties  and  privileges  it  is    obfervable 
that  there  is  a  coweSih?:  between  thdii.     Covenant  duties  have 
fpecial  blcfTuigs  annexed  to  them  ;  and  fpecial  blcfnngs  lay  bonds 
of  duty  on  thofe  v.lio  receive  tliern.     Thus,  that  qualihcation, 
wlutever  it  be,  by  which  we  arc   f.ivingly  united  to  Chriil,  has  n 
chain  of  privileges  connef^ed  with  it,  iiliiing  in  eternal  falvation. 
Thcfc  privileges  are   alfo  connected  with  the  eflential  and  fun- 
damental virtues  and  graces  rccpiired  in  the  gofpeh     The  habit 
Tir^d   principle  of  thefe  is  connected  with  the  proper  ac^s  and  ex- 
prefhons  of  tliem   in  the  life.     And  thefe  exprclTions  and  evi^ 
denccs  of  inward  fan<5titication  are  connected  with  a  right  to  pe- 
culiar  external  privileges  :   Whence  arifc  fpecial  obligations,   a 
vompliance  with  which  has  further  bleJhngs  annexed.     Duties 
quality  for,  z.\\<\  entitle  to  privileges  ;  and   privileges  qualify  for 
pnd  give  a  right  or  warrant  to  perform  duries.     Hut  the  relation, 
reference  or  refpcct  wliicli  the  duties  and  blcrhngs  of  the  cove- 
nant have  to  each  other  in  this  their  connection   requires  to  be 
further  confidercd. 

And  in  the  firil  place  the  order  in  which  they  are  connected  \i 
to  be  noted.  Some  are  prior,  or  before  others  in  the  order  of 
nature,  or  of  time.  l^hus  in  the  order  of  nature  the  call 
f)f  the  gofpelj  accompanied  with  the  influence  of  the  fpirit,  is 
a  divine  favour  going  before  faving  faith.  Faith,  whether 
v;e  confidcr  it  as  a  duty,  or  a  gift  of  God,  precedes  a  (:xV' 
jng  ur.ion  to,  and  intereft  in  Chrift,  and  juftification  through  his 
redemption  and  righteoufnefs,  with  all  thofe  benefits  .vhich  ac- 
comp-ny  or  fiov/  from  it.  Tiie  belief  of  the  heart  is  prefuppofcd 
ia  t|ic  profvHion  of  the  mouth.     And  profeltion  of  faith  which  is 


Of  the  Nem  CavencmU  IX 

^  duty,  goes  before  a  right  of  admiffion  to  the  fpeclal  ordinances 
and  privileges  of  external  communion  in  an  inftituted  church. 
If  we  confound  the  proper  order  in  which  gofpel  duties  and  blef-^ 
fmgs  are  conne6led,  we  Ihall  intirely  change  the  form  and  ftruc- 
ture  of  the  covenant. 

It  is  alfo  to  be  obferved  concerning  the  duties  and  benefits  of 
the  covenant  which  are  thus  conneded  in  their  proper  order,  that 
thofe  which  are  before  others  are  confidered  as  having  fome  kind 
of  caufality  with  refpecl:  to  thofe  which  are  confequent  to  them. 
In  other  words,  the  following  parts  in  the  feries  or  chain  of  cove- 
nant duties  and  bleffings  thus  hnked  together,  have  a  neceiTary 
dependance  on  the  foregoing,  and  could  not  be  without  them. 
Thus  there  are  fpccial  privileges  which  are  fufpended  on  faving 
faith,  via.  a  faving  intereft  in  Chrii%  juftification,  the  inhabitation 
of  the  fanditying  fpirit,  &c.  1  here  are  alfo  fpecial  external  priv- 
ileges annexed  to,  and  depending  upon  our  having  and  holding 
forth  credible  evidences  of  faith,  fuch  as  a  right  of  accefs  and 
admiffion  to  the  ordinances  of  inflituted  churches.  But  Chrifti*' 
ans  feem  not  fully  agreed  v^hat  term  beft  exprefles  this  relation 
between  the  anteced-ent  duty  or  qualification,  and  the  confequent 
privilege  annexed  to  it ;  or  how  the  latter  depends  on  the  former. 
Some  chufe  to  reprefent  the  qualifications  to  which  the  privileges 
of  the  covenant  are  annexed,  as  means  by  which  thefe  bleffings 
are  obtained.  But  the  meaning,  as  it  is  explained,  is  fo  general 
and  indetenninate,  that  it  leems  to  amount  to  no  more  than  this, 
that  the  mean  is  fomething  without  which  the  end  is  not  obtain- 
able. And  indeed  Dr.  Watts,  fays  expref^ly — "Every  fore- 
*'  going  bleffing  may  be  reckoned  in  fome  fenfe  as  a  means  with 
*'  regard  to  that  which  follows." — Others  maintain  that  the  gof- 
pel covenant  is  a  conditional  grant  or  promlfe  :  And  that  a  com- 
pliance with  covenant  duties  is  the  condition  or  term  on  which 
the  grant  of  covenant  bleffing  is  fufpended.  This  indeed  is  a 
word  which  fome  think  not  fo  fit  to  exprefs  the  qualifications  to 
which  bleffings  are  annexed  in  a  covenant  of  rich  and  free  grace  ; 
efpecially  as  the  qualifications  themfelves  are  as  free  gifts  as  any 
others.  And  befides,  the  word  itfelf  feems  to  admit  of  as  great  a 
latitude  in  its  meaning  as  the  other,  in  the  opinion  of  the  forccit- 
ed  author,  who  fays — "  Every  blelfmg  of  falvation  that  in  the 
''  neceffiary  order  of  nature  follows  another,  may  be  faid  to  be  fuf- 
"  pended  on  that  other  as  a  condition  without  which  it  fliall  not 
"  be  beftowcd." — However,  while  we  difclaim  all  pretence  to 
merit  in  any  qualifications  WTOught  in  us,  or  done  by  us,  and  ac- 
knowledge ourfelves  entirely  beholden  to  the  free  grace  of  God, 
and  the  righteoufnefs  of  Chrift  for  our  whole  falvadon,  with  all 
the  fn?ans  and  qualifications  whereby  w^  are  made  meet  for  the 

inheritance 


*»:  0/  the  New  Covc'fiant. 

inheritance  of  the  faints,  I  fee  not  why  our  aflertlng  the  condl* 
tional'ty  of  the  j^ofpcl  covenant  (houlcJ  be  fufpeckd  of  dctraclin^ 
from  the  honour  due  to  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  merit,  the 
power  and  love  of  our  divine  Redeemer.  And  Jiowever  vague 
the  meaning  of  the  word  condition  may  fcem,  in  itfclf,  yet  tiic 
fcnfe  is  fixed  and  determined  by  the  explanation  given  of  it, 
n.amely,  That  adl  or  qualification  of  the  party  with  whom  the 
covenant  is  made,  by  which,  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  cove- 
nant, the  party  has  a  title  to,  or  is  intcrclicd  in  the  benefits  thereia 
granted  or  promifcd.  In  this  fcnfe  we  conceive  the  new  cove- 
nant may  be  termed  conditional. 

When  any  one  to  whom  a  blcfiing  is  conditionally  promifed 
has,  or  complies  with,  the  condition  ;  then,  and  not  till  then,  the 
promife  becomes  abfolute.  The  blefllng  is  no  longer  fufpended 
on  a  future  contingency.  There  is  however  fomethin^  ohjoluic  in 
favour  of  mankind  grantejl  and  fecured  to  them  in  the  covenant 
of  grace,  antecedent  to  their  complying  with  its  condition.  For 
it  abfolutely  connects  the  benefits  of  divine  favour  with  mofi  gra- 
cious conditions,  and  fo  puts  men  into  a  falvable  ftate,  and  is  a 
ground  of  hope  concerning  them.  The  grace  of  the  covenant 
fo  far  extends  to  all,  that  favourable  terms  of  falvation  are  grant- 
ed to  them  ;  which  arc  alfo  accompanied  with  various  blcifings, 
means  and  encouragements  to  repentance.  But  an  intereft  in 
the  covenant  fo  as  to  have  accefsto  the  grace  and  blefilngs  there- 
in promifcd,  none  can  obtain  till  they  obtain  the  conditions  or 
qualifications  to  which  the  promifes  are  annexed. 


SECTION     V. 


Of  the  Condition  of  the  Covenant, 

AS  the  blefilngs  granted  or  promifed  in  the  covenant  are  man- 
ifold and  difiercnt,  of  which  fome  have  no  infepar^ible  or  con- 
liant  conneclion  with  others  ;  fo  the  conditions  or  qualifications 
inferring  a  title  thereto  arc  no  Ids  different,  diftin£l  and  fcparable. 
It  is  therefore  impofiiblc  to  determine  and  fiate  particularly,  what 
is  the  condition  of  the  covenant,  till  it  be  firfi  known,  to  what 
particular  blefilng  or  privilege  the  condition  enquired  for  lias  re- 
lation. For  one  blefiing  is  annexed  to  one  condition,  another  is 
fufpended  on  another.  Nor  can  we  find,  I  think,  any  one  :xci  or 
qualification  whatever  which  has  a  proirjile  of  all  covenant  blef- 
fuigs  -,  nor  do  I  find  any  act  of  compliance  with  there(iuirements 
of  the  covenant  fo  indifpenrably  nccefiary,  but  tiiat  a  pcrfon  may 

without 


Of  the  New     Covenant",  5i( 

without  It  have  an  interefl:  in  the  covenant,  fo  as  to  have  a 
right  according  to  the  gofpel  rule  to  fome  of  its  fpecial  blellings. 
If^'we  fliould  fay,  for  indance,  that  faving  faith  is  the  condition  ; 
yet  it  is  not  to  be  denied  that  many  who  have  not  faith  have  an 
interell  in  the  covenant,  and  right  to  fome  covenant  privileges. 
And  there  are  alfo  fome  covenant  privileges  to  which  many  who 
have  faith  have  not  a  regular  gofpel  right. 

Before  we  can  give  a  particular  anfvver  to  the  queflion?  What  Is 
the  condition  of  the  new  covenant,  we  muft  firftunderftand  wheth- 
er what  is  enquired  for  be  the  condition  of  entrance  or  admif- 
fion  into  covenant.  Or  the  condition  of  continuance  therein. 
Or  the  condition  on  which  a  right  to  fome  particular  covenant 
bleffing  is  fufoended.    Or  finally  the  condition  of  all  the  promifes. 

As  to  the  condition  of  entering^  being  received  into,  and  having 
an  intereft  in  the  covenant  3  it  is  to  be  noted  that  many,  even  all 
children  of  regular  church  members,  are  born  in  and  under  the 
covenant,  and  fo  have  an  abfolute  unconditional  grant  of  fome 
fpecial  privileges.  Their  relation  to  parents  who  are  entitled  to 
God's  gracious  promife  to  them  and  their  children,  gives  them  an 
intereft  in  the  covenant  withoiit  any  aciof  theirs,  as  the  condition. 

Adult  perfons  who  are  not  in  covenant  can  no  otherwife  be  re- 
gularly admitted  into  it,  than  by  their  compliance  with  conditions, 
or  obtaining  the  fpecial  qualifications  to  which  fome  covenant 
bleffing  or  privilege  is  annexed.  Whoever  is  entitled  to  any  cov- 
enant promife  or  grant  whatever  has  an  intereft  in  the  cove- 
nant. And  the  firft  a6t  or  qualification  in  any  one,  which  has 
fuch  a  promife  or  grant  annexed,  is  the  condition  of  entrance  into 
covenant  to  fuch  a  perfon. 

Now  as  the  bleffings  pertaining  to  the  external  and  internal 
adminiftration  of  the  covenant  are  of  a  different  kind,  fo  the 
qualifications  required  in  order  to  our  having  a  right  to  each  of 
them  refpec^ivcly  are  no  lefs  diff'erent. 

The  firft  act  or  qualification  which  has  a  promife  of  the  faving 
grace  and  bleffings  of  the  covenant  is,  I  think,  generally  held  to 
be  a  true  and  living  faith,  whereby  we  are  united  to  Chrift  in 
whom  all  the  promifes  are  yea  and  amen.  Faith  therefore,  with 
a  fincere  conf^nt,  or  reHipulation  agreeable  to  the  covenant  propo- 
fal,  feems  to  be  moft  properly  the  condition  of  accefs  to  thcfe 
bleffings  wljich  belong  to  its  invifible  adminiftration.  But  faith 
alone  gives  no  right  of  admiffion  to  the  external  privileges  grant- 
ed to  the  members  of  a  vifible  inftituted  church. 

What  then  is  the  condition  or  qualification  required  in  order  to 

a  regular  adiniffion  and  accefs  to  thefe  external  privileges  ?    This 

1  think  is  a  credible  profcffion  or  evidence  of  faith,  and  confent 

to  the  covenant,  exliibiled  without  known  hypccrily.     Whoever 

-  '  mak«s 


C4-  Of  the  N^evj  Co'-jcnant, 

makes  fuch  a  profcllion  thereby  comes  under  the  bonds,  and  la 
inverted  with  a  right  to  the  privileges  of  the  covenant  fo  far  as  to 
become  rightful  member  of  the  vifjblc  churcli.  He  is  a  viable 
faint,  regularly  qualified  to  come  and  be  admitted  to  the  fpecial 
outward  privileges  of  the  church. 

Whenever  any  one  has  the  condition  or  qualification  wliich  the 
gofpcl  rule  re(]uires  in  order  to  an  entrance  or  adiiiiflion  into  the 
covenant,  he  has  then  an  inteieif  therein,  and  is  abfolute!y  en- 
titled to  fome  of  its  blefTmv^s.  "ilicrc  are  promifes  or  grant* 
-bclongint^  to  him,  which  are  no  longer  fufpefuled  on  future 
conditions.  But  there  are  alfo  other  blelhngs  which  are  annexed 
to  a  compliance  with  further  conditions.  Kven  his  continuafice 
in  covenant,  and  the  prolongation  of  his  right  to  thofe  privileges 
to  which  he  is  now  entitled,  depend  on  his  future  behaviour.  For 
many  have  forfeited  and  lofl  tiieir  intereft  in  the  covenant,  with 
all  thofe  fpecial  privileges  which  once  rightfully  belonged  to 
them. 

If  now  it  be  enquired  what  is  the  condition  of  abiding  in  the 
covenant,  and  holding  an  intcreft  in  it,  1  would  obferve,  that  this 
quertion  is  chiefly  to  be  underitood  as  relating  to  an  intcrert  in  the 
covenant  in  refpect  of  its  external  adminitlration.  For  to  thofe 
who  have  accefs  to  its  invifible  grace  arid  faving  blefiings,  a  per- 
manent continuance  in  a  covenant  relation  to  God  is,  I  conceive, 
fecured  by  tlie  covenant  itfclf :  So  that  faith  by  which  we  become 
at  iirft  entitled  to  this  grace,  feems  moft  properly  the  condition 
of  a  permanent  title  to,  and  intereft  in  it.  But  there  are  alfo 
means  prcfcribed  in  the  gofpel,  a  diligent  ufe  of  which  is  necefla- 
ry  to  our  partaking  of  the  grace  and  bleflings  of  the  gofpel  :  And 
fo  walking  in  the  commandments  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord, 
may  be  termed  the  inftrumtntal  or  fecondary  conditions,  by  which 
we  obtain,  if  not  ^ ///.V  to,  -^^i  2i  continued  pc[]'ej[ion  and  partici- 
pation of  thofe  blelTings  of  grace  of  which  we  became  heirs  when 
wc  firft  became  the  children  of  Ciod  by  faith  in  Chrift 

But  an  intcieii  in  the  covenant  in  refpeSl  to  its  external  privi- 
leges, or  a  right  of  accefs  and  admifficn  to  the  ordinances,  may 
be  loft.  And  if  it  be  afked  upon  what  condition  a  vlfible  faint 
holds  his  llnnding  in  the  church  and  covenant,  I  conceive  it  is 
upon  the  condition  of  abiding  in  a  credible  profelfion  ot  chril^i- 
anity,  not  fallinq;  away  from,  or  overthrowing  the  credibility  of 
it,  cither  by  opc^k  dcfcclion  from  the  faith,  or  a  fcanJalous  life, 
obftinately  and  impcnitenily  perfilU-d  in,  after  admonition  with 
other  gofi-Jcl  means  have  been  faithfully  and  patiently  ufed  with 
him,  to  recover  him  from  the  error  of  his  way.  'Ih.ough  a  pro- 
feiTor  is  guilty  of  a  heinous  breach  of  covenant,  if  he  neglects  the 
duties  to'whi'cii  he  Hands  bound,  if  he  falls   iiUo  grofs  errors, 

fchifms, 


Of  the  New  Cov^nmf,  2i 

fchlfms,  and  feandalous  pra6lices  ;  yet  thefe  do  not,  I  think,  Im-* 
mediately  cut  him  oft  from  the  covenant  and  church  :  P'or  thert 
the  church  would  have  no  right  to  deal  with  him  in  a  way  of 
difcipline  :  For  what  have  we  to  do  to  judge  thole  who  are  witli-' 
out.  The  discipline  of  the  church  is  an  ordinance  to  be  admi- 
niftred  to  none  but  its  members,  for  the  healing  of  their  back- 
flidings.  Thofe  who  are  fo  fpiritually  unclean,  as  to  be  unlit 
to  communicate  in  holy  ordinances,  are  yet  to  be  admonifhed  as 
brethren.  The  Apoftles  acknowledged  the  Jews  to  be  in  cove- 
nant, notwithiknding  the  great  errors  and  corruptions  into  which 
they  had  fallen,  till  they  added  contumacy  to  unbelief,  refilled 
and  refufed  the  means  of  repentance,  which  had  been  long  and 
patientlyufed  with  them,  and  ftonedaway,  or  llew  thole  who  would 
have  meekly  inflrucled  them,  and  fo  rejeded  the  counfel  of  God 
againft  themfelves.     But  not  to  digrels — 

There  is  yet  another  condition,  if  it  may  be  fo  called,  which, 
though  no  covenant  duty,  is  yet  necelTary  to  our  continuing  in 
and  under  the  external  adminiftration  of  the  covenant,  and  hav- 
ing a  right  of  external  communion  ;  and  that  is  the  continuance 
of  our  natural  life.  Death  will  foon  cut  us  all  off  from  whatever 
right  we  have  to  ufe  gofpel  ordinances,  and  diflblve  our  relation 
to  the  vifible  church.  This  will  indeed  be  much  to  the  advant* 
age  of  all  true  faints,  who,  upon  their  difmifTion  from  church- 
es in  their  militant  ftate,  will  immediately  commence  members 
of  the  church  triumphant.  But  all  others  will  at  death  be  utter- 
ly cut  off  from  their  interefl  in  the  covenant,  excommunicated, 
anathematized,  and  delivered  over  to  Satan,  for  the  deftrudion 
of  foul  and  body  in  hell. 

But  after  we  are  in  covenant,  and  fo  abfolutely  entitled  to  fome 
of  its  bleffmgs,  there  may  yet  be  further  privileges  propofed,  and 
promifed,  our  right  to  which  is  fufpended  on  further  conditions. 
Thequeftion,  therefore,  concerning  the  condition  of  the  covenant 
may  be  underftood  of  the  condition  to  which  particular  grants  or 
promifes  arc  annexed. 

Every  true  believer  has  an  intcreft  in  the  invifible  grace  and 
bleffmgs  of  the  covenant  j  yet  he  has  no  right  to  ufe  the  ordi- 
nances and  privileges  appropriated  to  inftituted  churches,  but  up- 
on the  condition  of  his  exhibiting  fuch  a  profeffion  and  evidence 
of  his  faith  as  the  gofpel  requires  in  order  to  his  being  admitted 
to  them. 

Again,  every  regular  member  of  an  inilitured  church,  with  his 
children,  has  a  covenant  right  to  fome  ipecial  outward  church 
privileges  ;  yet  if  any  fuch  member  be  not  a  fubjcfi:  of  inward 
fandificaticii,  he  can  no  othcrwife  obtain  thofe  bleffmgs  v/hich 
accompany  fakation,  but  upon  the  condition  of  a  faving  faith. 
D  And 


^5  Of  the  Nifiv  Covenant, 

And  after  perfons  have  an  infcref^  in  the  external  ami  interna] 
blcllincs  of  the  covcnnnt,  there  (li  11  maybe  Tome  fpecial  privi- 
leges annexed  to  Tuch  conditions  as  perhaps  they  have  net  yet 
coinphcd  with.  Every  rightful  member  may  not  come,  or  be 
admitted  to  full  communiun,  till  he  has  obtained  further  and 
/pccial  qualik^cations  for  it :  And  there  are  fpecial  promifes  to  em- 
inent exercilcs  of  particular  graces  ;  for  inftance,  dirtributing  to 
th.e  necelRtics  of  the  faints,  which  beiong  not  to  every  true  be- 
liever. And  in  general,  eminent  attainments  in  holincfs  are  the 
condition  of  diltingulhed  blefliiigs  both  in  this  world  and  that  to 
come. 

But  if  the  condition  of  the  covenant  be  undcrrtood  of  that 
nualitication  which  has  a  covenant  grant  of  all  the  bleffmgs  and 
privileges  contained  in  all  the  ptomifes,  1  muH  freely  own  that  I 
know  of  no  one  qualification  whatever,  that  has  all  covenant 
bleilings  annexed  to  it.  It  is  only  a  diligent,  Iteady  and  perfe- 
▼ering  excrcife  and  prac^ife  of  chrirtian  graces  and  virtues,  which 
yt'iW  give  us  accefs  to  all  the  blelTings  contained  in  all  the  promifes. 


SECTION    VI. 


T))at  there  is  a  vifihlc  and  bivifihlc  HoI'mrfs^  which  is  cither  Rektlvf 
or  Inherent, 

IT  may  be  objeflcd,  though  It  be  granted  that  credible  pro- 
felTors  of  chrilVianity  are  vifiHy  faints,  and  fo  are  "jifibly  members 
of  the  church,  being  t'//7/'/y  in  the  covenant  of  grace,  and  have 
*u}fibly  ^  right  to  covenant  privileges,  and  are  accordingly  to  be 
admitted  to  external  communion,  and  regarded  and  treated  as 
faints  by  the  church,  who  can  only  judge  by  the  outward  ap- 
peann<.r  :  yet  none  but  thofc  who  are  the  fubjecls  of  inward 
lanctifying  grace  are  rroliy  faints,  or  rightful  members  of  the 
church,  or  have  an  inrcrcft  in  the  covenant,  or  a  right  in  the  fight 
of  God  to  any  of  its  privileges.  And  though  the  covenant  con- 
tains a  p:rant  of  outward  privileges,  as  well  as  invifible  and  faving 
bk'ffingN  to  tliofc  who  are  rcaiiy  intercOcd  in  it,  yet  neither  the 
Qne  nor  the  other  rightfully  belong  to  any  but  true  faints. 

It  is  here  fuppoled,  that  none  but  thole  who  arc  inwardly  fanc- 
tifird  are  faints  or  holy,  in  any  fcnfc,  and  tliat  a  credible  profef- 
fion  of  chrilbanity,  though  made  without  known  hypocrify,  con- 
flitutcs  a  perfon  a  fain*  only,  vlfihly^  jeevungJy^  and  /'/;  tkc  ccccunt  of 
men.     But  this,  for  what  I  can  find,  is  faid  without  proof  j  and 

is 


Of  the  New  Covenant,  '27 

IS  an  hypothefis,  unfupported  by  fcripture,  or  any  good  reafon. 
On  the  contrary,  the  Icripture  terms  thole  holy  or  faints,  v^ho 
c?.nnot  with  rational  probability  be  judged,  to  be  all  the  fubjefis 
of  internal  fanaitication.  Tims  the  whole  congregation  of  Itrael 
are  called  an  holy  people. 

Vifible  churches  are  lioly,  and  all  the  members  of  them,  not 
ej^cepting  the  infant  children.     Can  it  Ire  thought  probable  thst 
all  thefe  are  regenerated  trom  the  binh  ?  yet  they  are  e.xprcfsly 
affirmed  to  be  holy  or  faints.     And  is  it  not  accordingly  taught 
ind  received  in  the  church,  that  there  is  a  relative  and  federal  ho- 
Hnefs  which  belongs  to  all  church  members,  entirely  diverfe  nnd 
feparable  from  invvard  fandiihcation  r    Tiieie  are  tlicrefore  two 
forts  of  perfons,  who  in  fcripture  have  the  title  of  faints,  and  are 
really  fuch  in  their  kindy  tl^ough  in  diiierent  fenfcs.     The  one  are 
the  fubjeas  of  inward  and  in  vifible,  the  other  of  outward  and 
vifible  holln^fs.     A  vifible  faint  does  not  mean  one  who  is  only 
^  faint  fee  mingly^  or  in  appearance^  though  perhaps  he  m.ay  reallv 
be  no   kind  of  faint.     Ke  is  really  a  faint,  as  being  a  fubjedl  of 
outward  and  vifible  holinefs,  and  as  having  thofe  qualifications 
which,  according  to  the  gofpel  rule,  infer  his  having  really  an  in- 
tereft  in  the  covenant,  fo'far  as  to  have  a  right  to  external   cove- 
nant privileges ;  though  perhaps  he  may  not  be  a  fubje^  of  that 
inward  andinvifible  holinefs,  which  is  connedcd  with  an  intcreft 
in  the  inward,  invifible  and  faving  blelhngs  of  the  covenant.  Ma- 
ny feem  to  have  been  milled  by  imagining  that  a  vifhle  faint^  is  to 
be  confidercd  as  oppofed  to  a  real  cnc^  and  fo  means  no  more  than 
2^  feeming  one.    A  vifible  faint  properly  flands  oppofed  to  an  invifi- 
hU  or  inward  one^  even  as  the  vifible  church  ftands  oppofed  to  the 
invifible.     An  inftituted  church  is  a  real  churchy  a  vifible  jccieiyy 
formed  and  conftituted  according  to  the  rules  of  the  gofpel,  and 
is  commonly  termed  a  churchy  in  the  New  Teftament  :  Not  in- 
deed in  the  fame  fenfc  in  which  the  whole  colledlive  body  of  tiiofe 
who  are  inwardly  fanaiiicd,  are  called  the  church.     So  a  vifible 
faint  is  really  as  well  as  vifdny  one  in  fome  fenfe.     He  is  really  the 
fubjed  of  fome  kind  of  holinefs,  even  that  which  is  vifible,  exter- 
nal and  relative  :  Though  as  real  holinefs  is  often  ufed  in  contra- 
diftiiiaion  to  the  cutward  appearance  and  marks  of  inward  fantfti- 
fication,  every  vifible  faint,  may  not  be  really  holy.     In  a   word, 
fince  the  fcripture  gives  the  title  of  faints  to  credible  profeffors  cf 
chriftianity  and  their  children,  though  none  uill  fay  that  they  are 
all  the  fubjv^as  of  inward  fanclificatlon,  1  conceive  that   they  are 
really  jaints  in  fonje  fenfe.     And  to  fay  that  they  were  fo  termed 
through  a  miilaken  prefumption,  tliat  tliey  all  were  fuch,  even  as 
counterfeit  money  is  called   money  by  thofe  vho  prefume  it  is 
oood,  is  only  introducing  an  mbi'trary  hypothcfisj   to  ev^de  the 

phia 


2t8  Of  the  New  Covenant, 

plain  letter  of  the  fcripture,  without  anv  neccffity,  or  gone!  reafon 
that  yet  appears.  Men  may  cafily  fuppofe,  if  they  pleafe,  thai 
none  are  //;  any  fenfe  holy,  but  thofe  who  are  inwardly  fancli- 
ficd  ;  that  there  is  but  one  Ibrt  of  faints  fpokcn  ot  in  the  fcrip- 
ture ;  that  there  is  but  one  church,  even  the  myflical  \  that  a  vifi* 
bic  inliiiutcd  church,  as  fuch,  is  really  no  church,  but  only  the 
external  Hiew  and  appearance  of  a  church.  But  luppofitions  are 
no  proofs. 

As  this  notion  of  the  church,  the  covenant,  and  faintfnlp, 
which  in  efiect  excludes  all  but  inward  faints  from  a  right  of 
membcrfliip  in  the  church,  and  an  intcrefi  in  the  covenant  in  any 
rcfpecl-,  and  which  J  take  to  be  the  capital  miftai^e  of  the  Ana- 
baptirtg,  feemsto  have  been  unwarily  imbibed  by  fome  others.  I 
will  endeavour  to  Ibtc  and  explain  my  thoughts  on  this  point  a 
little  farther. 

The  word  h^ly^  cfpecially  as  ufed  in  the  Old  Teftament,  and 
applied  to  perfons  and  things,  expreffes  their  fiparat'ion  from  com- 
mon to  facred  and  divine  ufcs  ;  their  fpecial  relation  to  God^  as 
being  fet  apart,  devoted  and  dedicated  to  him,  and  fo  belonging 
to  him  in  a  fpecial  manner.  And  as  it  was  required  that  what 
was  thus  dedicated  be  clean  or  pure  from  defilement  ;  hence  the 
word  is  alfo  ufcd  to  exprefs  cleanncfs  or  purity.  What  is  holy  then 
i^ands  oppofed  to  what  is  common  or  profane  j  and  alfo  to  what 
is  unclean  or  polluted. 

Hence  naturally  arofe  the  difllnclion  of  relai'ivf  and  inherent 
holinefs.  Perfons  feparated  and  dedicated  to  God  are  termed 
holy  on  account  of  their  fpecial  relation  to  him,  and  Jiis  fpecial 
propriety  in  them.  And  as  this  peculiar  relation  to  God  ordina- 
rily took  place  by  means  of  a  covenant  which  fuch  perfons  had 
come  unilcr,  in  which  they  were  devoted  to  God  as  his  peculiar 
people  J  hence  this  relative  holinefs  is  alfo  commonly  termed/<v«Wv7/ 
or  covenant  holinefs,  which  exprefies  their  being  thus  fcpara>ed 
and  related  to  God  by  tlieir  being  in  and  under  a  covenant  dedi- 
cation to  him. 

All  therefore,  who  are  comprehended  in  that  covenant  by 
which  the  church  is  formed,  arc  relatively  or  federally  holy. 
They  are  fcparatcd  from  the  reft  of  the  world  ;  dedicated  to  (jod 
as  his  peculiar  people  ;  arc  under  fpecial  engagements  to  him,  and 
endowed  with  fpecial  privileges  and  rights. 

JJut  as  this  covenant  has  a  vilible  and  invifiblc  admlniflration, 
fo  there  is  both  a  vifible  and  invifiblc  fcparation,  dedication  and 
relation  to  God  according  to,  and  by  means  of  the  covenant. 
J\.clatlvc  federai  holinefs  therefore  is  either  inz'i/ible  er  viji/f/e.  They 
ivho  cordially  confcnt  to  the  covenant,  have  an  invifiblc  intcrcrt 
ia  it;  art*  crjiiilcd  to  its  invifiblc  grace  and  blclfings  j   are  under 

an 


^f  the  Kiw  Covmant,  29 

an  invifible  reparation  to  God  :  ftand  in  an  invifiblc  relation  to 
him  as  his  peculiar  people,  in  diftindion  from  others  ;  have  an  in- 
vifible adoption  into  the  number  of  his  children  ;  and  an  invifi- 
ble, vital  and  permanent  union  to,  and  communion  with  Chrift. 
Thus  they  have  an  hivlfible  federal  holinefs,  on  which  account 
they  are  termed  true  or  real  fatnti  in  the  moft  important  fenfe. 
But  as  their  faintdiip  is  invifible,  it  gives  them  no  right  according 
to  gofpel  rule  to  any  external  church  privileges.  Hiefe  pertain 
to  "the  external  adminiilration  of  the  covenant,  and  are  granted 
only  to  vifible  faints. 

Now  all  thefubjedfsof  this  invifible  ^relative  or  federal  holinefs  ^\\2.VQ 
alfo  an  inherent  holinefs^v^Yiizh  is  inward  and  invifible.  Their  hearts 
are  purified  from  the  defilement  of  fm  :  They  are  fanflified  thro' 
the  trurh  ;  and  fo  they  are  fpiritually  clean,  through  the  word 
which  Chrift  has  fpoken  to  them,  and  the  renewing  of  the  holy 
fpirit  dwelling  in  them.  On  this  accouut  alfo  they  are  termed 
true  fnints^  by  way  of  difcrimination  from  others  who  are  alfo 
ftiled  faints,  and  are  truly  fuch  in  fome  fenfe  ;  though  not  in  the 
mofc  important  fenfe,  as  I  fnall  now  proceed  to  iTiew.     For, 

There  is  alfo  a  vifible  holinefs  or  faintlhip,  and  that  both  relative 
and  inherent,  which  belongs  to  thofe  who  are  fo  in  covenant  as  to 
be  entitled  to  thofe  external  privileges  which  are  granted  to  regu- 
lar and  rightful  members  of  infbituted  churches.  Some  who  are 
not  inwardly  fandiiied,  are  yet  fo  far  in  covenant,  that  they  are 
rightful  members  of  the  vifible  church,  as  all  but  the  Ani- 
baptilis  muil:  grant.  Now  fuch  are  vifibly  and  externally  called, 
and  feparated  by  and  to  God  from  the  refi:  of  the  world  ;  openly 
and  profefiedly  dedicated  to  him,  they  avouching  him  to  be  their 
God  and  themfelves  to  be  his  people.  And  they  are  fo  far  own- 
ed by  God,  that  he  calls  them  his  people  ;  externally  adopts 
them  ;  puts  his  name  upon  them  ;  endows  them  with  fpecial 
privileges  ;  gives  them  his  word  and  ordinances  ;  all  outward 
means  adapted  to  perfuade  and  win  their  hearts  to  love  and  fear 
him,  and  keep  his  commandments.  Now  fuch  flan d  in  a  fpecial 
relation  to  God  as  his  vifible  covenant  people.  On  this  account 
they  are  termed  holy^  as  being  the  fubjeds  of  an  external  federal 
kolincfs,  Jn  this  fenfe  the  congregation  of  Ifrael  are  termed  an 
holy  people,  to  whom  pertained  the  adoption  and  the  covenants. 
And  infiituted  churches  are  compofed  of  vifible  faints.  And  the 
children  of  believers  are  all  federally  holy. 

This  external  vifible  holinefs  is  not  merely  a  flicw  and  appear- 
ance of  fomething  whofe  exifience  is  doubtful  ;  but  it  is  real 
in  its  kind  j  though  it  be  of  a  difTerent  kind  from  that  which 
ari/cs  fr,oa>   an  invifiblc  and  faving  relation  to  God.     And  the 

fcripture 


3<>  Of  ih  Nm  C^vcnani. 

fcrlpturo  fpeaks  of  fome  kind  of  relative  union  which  even  barren 
brandies  have  to  Chiift  the  true  vine,  thouijh  it  be  not  vital  and 
permanent. 

There  is  alfo  what  may  be  termed  an  external  inheretit  hol'uufs, 
confining  in  a  profeflion  atid  convcrfation  conformed  vifibly  to 
the  gojpel.  Of  this  the  ApolHe  mull  be  underflood  to  fpeak 
wlieu  he  tells  the  ThelTalonians,  Ye  are  witneflcs,  and  (lod  alfo 
how  iiohly  and  unblamcably  we  behaved  ourfeives  among  you 
who  believe.  For  they  could  be  only  wiincffes  of  that  external 
holinefs  which  was  vifible  in  his  converfation.  There  is  an  out- 
ward clcanncfs  of  the  hands,  as  well  as  an  inward  purity  of  the 
iieart. 

Now  they  who  profefs  faith  and  confent  to  the  gofpel  covenant 
witiiout  known  hypocrify,and  behave  externaily,  agreeably  to  the 
rules  of  the  gofpel,  are  vifible  faints  ;  and  have  1  conceive,  an  in- 
tercft  in  the  covenant  not  only  vifiul\'^  i.  e.  feemingly  and  in  the 
account  of  men,  but  arc  truly  in  it  in  the  fight  of  God,  fo  far  that 
they  have  a  covenant  right  'of  admilBon  and  accefs  to  the  out» 
ward  ordinances  which  Chrifi  has  inflituted  and  given  to  hi^  vifi, 
ble  churches.  This  external  holinefs  is  the  condition  or  qualifi- 
cation to  which  the  covenant  ccnnedts  a  right  to  thefe  privileges. 
A  vjfible  faint  is  as  truly  a  member  of  the  vifible  church,  and  has 
a  divine  right  to  the  vifible  privileges  granted  cxclufively  to  it,  as 
an  inward  faint  is  a  member  of  the  myftical  church,  and  has  a 
divine  right  to  the  inviiible  grace  and  blefTings  granted  exclufive^ 
iy  to  it.      But  ihcfe  tilings  may  hereafter  be  furTher  difeulTed. 

^\  ill  any  fay,  that  the  Apoiljes  did  verily  believe  all  the  members 
of  ehriftian  churches  whom  they  flile  faints,  to  be  inward  faints  ? 
That  the  Apoftle  Paul,  when  he  fays  that  the  children  of  believ- 
ers are  holy,  did  pofitively  believe  that  all  fuch  children  were,  and 
always  to  the  end  of  the  world  would  be  inwardly  fanclihed  from 
the  womb  ?  That  Peter,  when  he  told  the  fews  at  the  feaft  of 
Pcntecoa  that  the  promife  was  to  tliem  and  their  children,  and 
atrcrward  told  a  multitude  gathered  about  them  that  they  were 
children  of  the  covenant,  did  really  believe  that  they  were  al'l  fo  in 
covenant  as  actually  to  partake  of  the  faving  grace  and  bleifmgs'of 
it  i"  I,  for  my  part,  cannot  think  that  anv  will  lay  fo.  If  not,I  would 
alk  agam,  whether  the  ApoAlcs  would  call  ihofe  famts,  and  tcH 
t.iem  that  tlie  promife  of  the  covenant  belonjied  to  them,  whom 
yet  they  did  not  believe  to  be  huly  in  any  fenfe,  or  to  have  any 
real  intereft  in  the  covenant. 

Alter  all,  this  difpute  fecms  to  be  in  a  great  meafure  about 
words.  1  or  let  it  he  fuppofed  that  the  myflical  cl.urch  is  the  one 
only  church  acknowledged  in  fcripture.  7hat  there  is  but  one 
lor<   of   faints  il^re   fpokcn  of,  even  faints  iii  heart  j  that  ihefc 

only 


The  Rights  and  Privileges  of  Church  Mnnlcrs^  t^c.  31 

tinly  are  really  in  and  under  the  covenant ;  and  that  focleties  of 
proteiTed  chriftians  are  termed  churches  only  becaufe  they  appear 
like,  and  fo  are  prefumed  to  be  of  the  church  rriyftical.  When 
v/e  have  thus  adjured  our  ideas  and  flile  conformably  to  this  fup- 
pofition,  then  we  may  go  on  further,  and  fay  that  according  to 
the  gofpel  rule  the  outward  ordinances  are  not  given  to  the  real 
church,  and  to  real  faints,  as  fuch,  but  that  all  and  only  thofe 
who  are  vifibly  outwardly  and  fecmingly  faints  and  of  the  church 
have  a  right  and  warrant  to  come  and  be  admitted.  That  it  is 
not  holinefs,  or  an  intereft  in  the  covenant,  but  the  credible  fign.*? 
thereof,  which  qualify  for  this  privilege.  Thus  the  qualifications 
for  chrifiian  communion  will  remain  the  fame  as  before.  V^ifi- 
ble  churches  will  ftill  be  compofed  of  the  fame  characflers  :  Seem- 
ing  faints  and  churches y  will  have  a  divine  right  to  the  fame  privi- 
leges, as  if  they  were  fiippofed  to  be  really  faints,  and  churches, 
and  under  the  external  adminifTration  of  the  covenant  as  before 
explained.  What  then  is  gained  by  (bating  things  in  this  man- 
tier.  Nothing  of  any  importance,  that  I  can  fee.  Only  we  have 
hid  ourfelves  under  a  neceflity  of  putting  a  drained  interpretation 
on  many  exprefllons  of  fcripture,  to  make  them  comport  with 
#ur  fchemc. 


■>»»^^>^ffi^^4<- 


CHAP.      III. 

7he  RIGHTS   and  PRIVILEGES    ^/CHURCH 
MEMBERS  explained  and  d'l/lmguijhed. 

SECTION   I. 

^hefubje^  opened. — Explanations  and  Di/iin£iions  relative  to  ihePriv- 
ilfges  and  Rights  of  Church  Members, — Several  ^efiions  or  Cafes 
Jiated, 

THE  enquiry  concerning  a  right  to  the  privileges  of  com- 
munion with  an  inftitutcd  chrifiian  church  has,  not  with- 
out reafon,  engaged  the  ferious  attention  of  many  chriftians.  And 
notvvithftanding  what  has  been  offered  on  the  fubjed^,  it  has  been 
thought  by   fome  that  further   fearchings  and  difcoveries  were 


wantfid 


Thar 


2,2         The  Rights  attd  Pnvileres  of  Church  Members^  &c^ 

That  this  enquiry  may  be  purfucd  to  advantage,  the  fird  thing 
to  be  attempted  is,  that  tlie  luhjcwt  be  opened,  by  a  jull  explana- 
tion of  the  rights  and  privileges  in  quellion,  and  uf  leveral  terms, 
phrafcs  and  diftinctions  which  occur  in  dircourfes  on  this  lubjedt, 
or  which  we  may  hereafter  have  occaGon  to  make  ufeof. 

Communion  with  an  inftiiutcd  church  in  the  ufe  of  gofpel 
ordinances  if  taken  in  its  full  amplitude  and  extent,  is  a  com- 
plication of  fcveral  duties  and  privileges  ;  fome  of  which  are  ia 
their  nature  To  difiinit,  that  they  may  fubfift  feparate  and  apart 
from  the  reft.  A  perf(fln  may  be  intcrcfted  in  the  covenant,  a 
rightful  member  of  the  church,  have  a  right  to  fome  of  its  pecu- 
liar privileges,  but  not  to  all.  He  may  be  a  proper  fubject,  qua- 
lified according  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel  to  come,  and  be  admit- 
ted to  communion  in  fome  fpecial  ordinances,  but  not  in  all. 
Yea,  he  may  have  a  right  to  attend  the  adminiflration  of  an  or- 
dinance, and  yet  not  be  entitled  to  the  whole  benefit  and  privilege 
of  it. 

All  who  are  in  covenant,  and  of  the  inftituted  church,  have  • 
right  to  peculiar  privileges  ;  particularly  to  the  ordinances  appro- 
priated to  the  church.  But  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  this  priv- 
ilege has  two  parts  or  branches.  'Ihc  outwarA  part  belongs  to  all 
rightful  members  in  various  degrees,  according  to  tlieir  feveral 
capacities  and  qualifications.  And  they  are  to  have  external 
communion  with  each  other,  as  there  is  occafion,  in  a  joint  ufeof 
outward  ordinances,  with  other  tokens  and  expreffions  of  brother- 
ly r'^lation  and  affciftion  mutually  given  and  received.  But  the 
privilege  of  the  ordinances  has  alfo  an  inward  party  an  invifible 
grace,  virtue  and  blelfing  in  their  outward  adminillration  and  ufe. 
And  chriliians  have  invilible  communion  in  joint  exercifes  of 
fpiritual  worfnip,  and  cordial  charity  towards  each  otlier  ;  and  in 
jointly  partaking  of  the  blelfrngs  of  divine  grace  conveyed  in  and 
by  the  outward  ufe  of  ordinances  to  thofe  who  worthily  attend 
upon  tt.em. 

It  is  alio  to  be  noted,  that  though  all  members  of  an  inrtituted 
church  are  prooer  fuhj^rJh  of  externa!  communion,  yet  all  fuch 
are  not  entitled  to  all  the  privileges  of  full  cowmunion.  The  mi- 
nor children  of  church  members  are  alfo  members ;  and  areaccoid- 
incly  to  bebaptifed  ;  and  the  church  is  to  cxprcfs  their  chriliian 
charity  towards  them  by  receiving  them  as  belonging  to  Chrilt, 
intended  in  the  covenant,  as  the  children  of  God,  at  leaR  by  ex- 
ternal adoption,  as  federally  holy,  and  as  thofe  concerning  whom 
there  are  fpecial  reafons  to  hope  that  they  either  are,  or  will  be  in- 
wardly fanc^iticd.  They  are  the  fpeciai  objech  of  the  infpcction, 
prayers  and  b^jnedi^Siions  of  the  church  ;  and  care  is  to  be  takca 
tliat  they  be  brought  up  in  the  nunuic  and  adiuoniiioi^  of  the 

Lord. 


Tije  Rights  and  Privileges  of  Church  Me?nbers,  &iC,  3  j; 

Lord.  And  as  they  advance  to  adult  age,  they  have  the  fpecial 
privilege  of  being  under  the  watch  and  difcipline  of  the  church 
and  the  difpenfation  of  the  word  and  ordinances  of  God.  This 
right  of  inemberfhip,  with  the  external  privileges  thert;to  an- 
nexed, belongs  to  the  children  of  all  members  who  are  not  i'o 
fcandalous  as  juftly  to  forfeit,  and  lofe  their  fcanding  in  the 
church.* 

But  infant  members,  are  not  qualified,  and  have  not  a  right  to 
come,  and  be  admitted  to  the  Lord's  fupper,  and  the  fpecial  priv- 
ileges of  full  communion.  And  this  too,  1  conceive,  may  be  ihe 
cafe  with  fome  adult  members.  They  may  labour  under  fo  much 
ignorance  and  miftake,  particularly  as  to  the  nature  and  defign  of 
this  ordinance  and  the  qualifications  for  it,  as  that  they  cannot 
come  to  it  without  wounding  their  ccnfcience.  They  may  think 
•that  none  can  warrantably  come,  unlefs  they  have  more  certain 
evidence  of  inward  fandiiication  than  they  have  yet  attained  to, 
Miliakes  like  this  have  probably  kept  many  back,  whofe  right  of 
fnemberlliip  was  unquefbonable  ;  who  abide  in  a  credible  pro* 
felTion  of  the  chritlian  religion,  joined  with  an  unblameablc  con* 
verfation,  and  are  hopefully  perfons  of  chriftian  piety.  While  one 
is  under  a  miftake  of  this  kind,  he  cannot  in  faith  take  the  {land* 
ing  and  privileges  of  a  member  in  full  communion  ;  how  mucli 
foever  his  profefTion  and  practice  may  commend  liim  to  the  cha* 
rity  of  others ;  and  how  good  reafons  foever  lic  may  have  cf  tho 
hope  that  is  in  him.  And  I  find  no  warrant  in  the  gofpel  to  ex- 
communicate a  rightful  church  member,  a  ferious  and  credible 
profefibr  of  an  unblameable  life,  becaufe  he  has  not  fuch  undoubt- 
ing  confidence  in  his  own  fitnefs  to  come  to  the  table  of  the  Lord, 
as  he  perhaps  through  miftake  thinks  would  be  neceflary  to  war- 
rant his  fo  doing.  Such  therefore  mud,  I  think,  be  allowed  to 
be  rightful  members,  and  as  fuch  entitled  to  fpecial  church 
privileges  ;  though  the  fcruples,  doubts  and  mifiakes  they  labour 
under  unfit  them  for  the  privilege  of  full  communion.  There- 
fore though  we  have  no  concern  with  the  half-way  covcnarA^  whicU 

fome 

*  Some  liave  thought  tliat  no  adult  perfonsareto  I)e  accounfed  church 
members  unlefs  they  couie  into  full  coinnmnion.  Dut  our  cir.irches  have 
always  been  gencraJly  of  a  difterent  judgment  ;  ndniitting  thufe  v\ho  pro- 
tefs  faith,  and  a  confent  to  the  covenant,  to  fome  privileges  of  external 
commimion  for  themfelves  and  children,  though  ihey  (hou!d  rut  come  to 
the  Lord's  fupper.  The  reafons  on  wliich  theirjudginent  and  prafticeare 
grounded  may  be  feen  in  ihe  refultof  the  fynod  at  Boiionin  the  year  1662. 
Which  are  more  largely  diflcuded  and  defended  by  Mr.  John  Allen,  Mr. 
Richard  Mather,  Mr.  Jonathan  Mitchcl.  Whofe  argument^  I  thit^k  luy« 
never  been  well  anfwered,  and  I  fer?  not  ho-.v  they  cao  be, 

E 


34  T'/;^'  Rights  and  Privileges  of  Church  Memhersy  l^c» 

foine  talk  of,  yet  we  dare  not  refufc  to  admit  io  partial  cofnmunim 
orderly  and  righrful  members,  though  by  realon  of  their  doubts 
or  miilakcs  tiu-y  Hiould  not  appear  actually  ht  to  come  to  the 
Lord's  fupper  to  their  comfort  and  cdificatiun. 

j>ut  wiihout  dircuffnig  this  point,  it  is  luppofed  that  feme  who 
have  i;ot  a  ri;^ht  of  adtual  firncls  for  full  communion  may,  as 
rigliiifcrl  members,  be  proper  fubjects  o( J'.me  I'peciai  church  privi- 
leges. But  there  are  Tome  further  fpecial  external  privileges  which 
belong  to  members  in  full  communion  :  Some  ordinances,  to 
whieh  fuch  only  may  come  and  beadniitied;  particularly  theLord's 
Tjj^per,  and  izivinL;  their  fuffrage  with  the  church  in  acls  of  go- 
vernment and  difcipline,  (not  to  mention  the  peculiar  privileges 
of  public  ufiicers.)  Alcmbers  of  this  clafs  are  not  only  to  be  ref- 
pccted,  loved  and  treated  as  difcipies  of  Chrill  in  charitable  ac- 
count, but  alio  as  more  coniirmed  and  perfect  members  in  fpirit- 
lial  attainments. 

Thefe  oblervations  (hew  that  the  fubjecl  propofed  to  examina- 
tion involves  fcveral  diftin£t  cafes  which  will  require  to  be  dif- 
cuffed  feparately. 

Firft,  Who  are  qualified  according  to  the  rule  of  the  gof-* 
pel  to  be  members  of  an  inftituted  church  ?  . 

Secondly,  Who  are  qualiried  for,  and  have  a  right  to  tne  priv- 
ileges of  full  external  communion  ? 

Thirdly,  Who  have  a  covenant  right  to  the  inward  fpecial 
blelTmg  of  Chrid,  and  the  fane^ifying  virtue  and  efficacy  of  the 
ordinances,  in  and  with  the  outward  adminiftration  and  ufe  of 
them  ? 

It  is  further  to  be  obferved,  that  the  external  communion, 
which  church  members  have  with  each  other  in  gofpel  ordinan- 
ces, is  cirb.cr  nrhvf  or  pajfive.  When  we  voluntarily  come  and 
join  with  the  church  in  ufmg  fpecial  ordinances,  we  have  a^ive 
communion  with  them.  But  they  who  are  only  paffive  fubje(S^s  to 
whom  fprcial  ordinances  or  privileges  are  applied,  as  in  the  ad- 
minitlration  of  baptilm  to  infants,  thefe  have  pajj'ivc  communion. 
And  this  is  alfo  the  cafe  when  any  one  is  admitted  iwto  the  church, 
or  to  anv  fpecial  privilei;e  ;  for  admiffion  is  net  the  a6\  of  the 
perffm  admitted,  but  of  ihofe  who  admit  liim. 

Hence  the  right  of  external  communion  with  an  inAitutcd 
church  confilU  of  two  parts  or  branches.  Firft,  the  right  of 
pajfive  ammuniony  ^r  o^  hcit:"  admitted  Tis  fit  fubjects  to  whom  fpe- 
cial ordii\ances  are  to  be  adminifiered,  or  on  w  honi  Ipecial  exter- 
nal privilo<;es  are  to  be  conferred.  This  we  ihall  for  dil^inction 
call  a  ri^ht  of  admijjion  \  or  a  /////•  to  the  privilege  of  being  admit- 
ted,  regarded,  ar.d  treated  by  the  church  as  a  proper  lubjeil^  of 

external 


ne  Rights  and  Privileges  of  Church  Members^   Iffc.         35 

external  communion.  The  other  branch  is  a  right  o/aSfive  com- 
munion ;  of  coming  voluntarily  into  the  church,  of  ufing  the  fpe- 
cial  ordinances  and  privileges  which  belong  only  to  its  members. 
And  this  we  may  call  a  right  of  acafs,  or  a  warrant  to  come,  to 
aflc  for,  a6^ively  receive,  and  ufe  thefe  privileges. 

A  title  to  admijfion^  and  a  warrant  for  coming  are  very  differ- 
ent :  They  are  annexed  to  different  qualitications,  and  ftand  on 
different  grounds.  A  perfon  whofe  right  of  admiffion  is  clear 
and  unexceptionable  may  have  no  right  or  warrant  at  all  to  come 
for,  or  ufe  the  privileges  of  a  rightful  member.  Though  a  right 
of  admiffion  and  of  acccfs  are  both  required  to  give  one  a  full  and 
regular  right  to  the  privilege  of  external  communion,  yet  they  mufl: 
by  no  means  be  confounded  together  :  but  confidered  and  deter- 
mined feparately  by  their  proper  rules  and  meafures.  1  (hall  there- 
fore in  difcuffmg  the  right  of  external  connnunion,  enquire  iirll 
who  have  a  riglit  to  be  admitted,  and  then  who  have  a  right  to 
come. 

SECTION     XL 

Other  Di/linSlions  confukred* 

BESIDES  thefe  diftincf^ions,  which  we  have  propofed  for  tlic 
purpofe  of  reducing  the  feveral  branches  of  this  complicated  fub- 
jefV  to  a  proper  train  and  method,  that  fo  each  part  may  be  ex- 
amined without  confufion  ;  there  are  feveral  others  to  be  met 
with  in  the  difcourfes  of  thofe  who  have  treated  on  this  argument : 
Such  as  a  vifihle  right^  a  right  in  the  fight  or  account  of  tneuy  contra- 
diftinj.*.;ifhed  from  a  right  in  fight  of  God. 

On  this  1  would  obferve.  That  the  gofpel  Is  the  rule  by  which 
all  rights  to,  or  claims  of  fpiritual  privileges  are  to  be  tried.  If 
we  judge  according  to  this  rule,  as  we  ought  to  do,  no  rights  can 
be  vifible  to  us  but  fuch  as  are  real.  Nonentities  are  not  vifible 
objects.  Whatever  is  vifible  either  to  the  bodily  or  mental  eye  is 
certainly  real,  unlefs  our  eyes  are  in  fault,  and  create  their  own 
objects. 

A  vifible  right  then  is  not  to  be  oppofcd  to  a  real  ojie,  or  confi- 
dered as  of  doubtful  validity.  It  is  founded  in  reality.  It  is  by 
the  rule  of  the  gofpel  annexed  to  certain  qualiiications  which  may- 
be fcen  by  men.  As  far  as  it  goes,  it  is  as  lirm  as  the  covenant 
of  grace,  on  which  it  is  founded.  It  properly  llands  oppofed  only 
to  thofe  rights  ivhich  are  iuvifible  to  men,  and  aie  not  within  their 


view  and  cognizance. 


ft 


3^  TT'^  Rights  and  Privileges  df  Church  Meniben^  l^c. 

It  is  only  the  rnht  ofadmijpon  which  is  vif:bU  to  the  church,  or 
of  whicli  they  hi\  e  a  warrant  to  judge.  And  this  hclon?^s  reah'y 
to  all  whom  the  church  ought  to  receive,  be  their  inward  cha- 
racter and  fjuaiifications  what  they  may.  Whether  fuch  have  a 
right  to  come^  ar.d  adively  take  and  ufc  the  privilege  o^  members, 
the  church  knows  not.  They  cannot  difcern  thofe  inward  qua- 
lihcations  to  whicli  the  right  of  acccfs  is  annexed.  1  he  o.oor 
keeper?  of  the  church  are  bound  not  to  debar  any  from  external 
communiL'Q  who  have  this  vifible  right,  this  richt  of  adrmjjjoti ; 
but  receive  them  as  chriftian  brethren  in  charitable  account.  And 
tliough  the  rule  of  the  gofpel  fhould  be  plainly  laid  before  thofc 
v^'ho  offer  themfelves  for  admifllon  to  fpecial  privileges,  and  it  is 
the  duty  of  fpiritual  guides  to  afTirt  them  in  examining  themfelves, 
yet  it  mufl  be  left  to  every  man^s  confcicncc  to  determine,  whe* 
ther  he  has  a  good  warrant  to  take  and  ufe  thofe  piivileges  to 
which  he  may  be  admitted. 

A  vifible  right  to  church  privileges  in  the  fight  of  men,  judging 
according  to  tlierulc  of  the  gofpel,  is  therefore  not  a  merc/eemifig 
rig.hty  or  an  appearance  of  doubtful  reality.  It  is  valid  in  the 
fight  of  God.  'I  he  adt  of  a  church  regularly  receiving  to  com- 
munion thufe  who  have  2  \'i(\bk  right,  is  ratified  by  Chrid  him- 
felf,  who  fays,  Suffer  fuch  to  come-,  and  forbid  them  not.  Who- 
foever  recciveth  fuch  in  my  name  receiveth  me. 

But  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  a  vifible  right,  though  real  and 
valid  in  tlie  fight  of  God  and  man,  yet  is  no  warrant  for  any  one 
a6livt'iy  to  take  and  ufe  any  of  thejpccial  ordinances  or  privileges  of  the 
church.  It  is  not  a  /w//and  abfeluie  r'lghi  to  them.  It  is  only  on« 
branch.  The  other  lies  out  of  the  fight  of  the  church,  and  is  to  be 
examined  and  np}>roved  in  the  court  of  confcience.  He  who  has  a 
vilibleright,  may  indeed  claim  the  privilege  of  living  the  doors  of 
the  church  open  to  receive  him,  and  upon  his  coming  in,  he  is  a 
proper  fubjedl  of  paffive  communion,  that  is,  to  be  received  and 
regarded  as  a  faithful  brother.  But  if  he  has  not  alio  a  right 
arifing  from  inwarfl  qualifications,  which  no  man  can  dilcern  in 
anoth.cr,  he  can  have  no  lawful  acccfs  a6f ively  to  take  and  uk  the 
privltegfs  of  a  member. 

Upon  the  whole  ;  if  any  by  a  vifible  right  to  privileges  mean 
no  more  than  2ifeming  one,  this  ouglit  to  be  of  no  more  account 
v-ith  mm,  than  it  is  in  the  Tght  of" God.  A,  nullity  will  be  re- 
garded as  fuch,  if  it  be  judged  of  accordinc^  to  ihe  rule.  If  by  a 
vifible  right  be  meant  a  right  connci'^ed  xvitt?  qualif cations  difccrna^ 
lie  by  mcn^  which  fecms  to  be  the  mof^  proper  accejilation  ;  this, 
9S  far  as  it  p:oes,  is  as  real  and  valid  in  the  fight  of  God,  as  it 
eyght  to  bv  in  \\\%  account  of  men,    '1  he  fubjc*^  is,  in  the  juft 

account 


The  Right  of  Jdmiff.on  into  the  Church.  §f 

account  of  the  church,  and  by  the  fentence  of  God  himfelf,  en- 
titled to  admiiFion  to  external  communion.  Finally,  if,  by  a  right 
in  the  fight  of  God,  be  meant  a  full  and  ahfolute  right  to  privileges 
to  ufe  as  well  as  be  admitted  to  them,  this  none  have  m  the  fight 
of  the  churchy  which  pretends  not  to  difcern  thofe  inward  quali- 
fications which  are  neceiTary  to  give  one  this  right.  In  a  word, 
though  chriftians  may,  in  the  fight  of  God,  have  a  covenant 
right  to  important  privileges,  which  the  church  cannot  difcern, 
yet  I  conceive  that  there  is  no  vifible  right  which  any  one  has  in 
the  juit  account  of  men,  which  is  not  as  good  and  valid  in  the 
fight  of  God.  Perhaps  the  loofe  way  in  which  fome  ufe  this 
diftindion,  of  a  vifible  right  in  the  fight  of  men,  and  real  right 
in  the  fight  of  God,  may  have  led  fome  unwarily  to  imagine, 
that  the  church  can  act  only  in  an  uncertain,  conjectural  manner, 
in  judging  who  are  entitled  to  external  privileges,  which  is,  I 
thmk,  a  miftalce,  tending  to  fill  the  minds  of  chriltians  with  fcru- 
ples,  and  entangle  them  in  inextricable  perplexities.  But  if  they 
attend  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  and  regulate  their  judgment 
concerning  the  vifible  rights  of  proponants  by  it,  they  need  not 
doubt  but  that  whatfoever  they  bind  on  earth  is  bound  in  heaven, 
and  whatfoever  they  loofe  on  earth  is  loofed  in  heaven. 

Having  endeavoured,  in  the  preceding  remarks,  to  give  fome 
general  opening  to  the  fubje6t,  I  fhall  next  proceed  to  confider  the 
federal  cafes  mentioned  in  their  order. 


CHAP.      IV. 
Of  the  RIGHT  ^/ADMISSION  into  the  CHURCH. 

SECTION    L 

^he  Right  ef  Admiffton  diftinSl  from  the  Right  of  Accefs. — Vifihh 
Saints  the  Subjects  of  it.^^External  liolinefs  only  properly  f-'ifible,-^ 
In  what  Senfe  imvard  Holinejs  may  be  Jaid  to  be  Vifible, 

THE  enquiry  now  to  be  efpecially  attended  to  is,  who  have  a 
right  of  admiffwn  intG)  the  church  ;  who  are  qualified  to  have  fome 
at  leaft  of  the  fpecial  outward  privileges  of  church  membtrs  con- 
ferred upon  them  \ 

The 


^»  TJje  Right  of  Admijfion  into  the  Church, 

The  right  of  admiflion  now  enquired  for,  evidently  means  not 
the  right  of  admitting  into  the  church.  It  belongs  to  the  churcli 
in  fubordination  to  Chrill,  miniilerally  and  declaratorily  in  his 
name,  to  admit  or  rcjcdl  thofe  who  offer  themfelves.  Uut  it  is 
the  right  of  being  admitted  to  external  communion^  or  of  having  fpecial 
privileges  conferred  upon  one,  of  which  we  are  confidering  who 
are  riglitful  fubjec^s. 

Since  admilhon  in  this  fenfe  is  not  the  aiSl  of  the  perfon  ad- 
mitted, but  a  paflive  reception  of  a  privilege  ;  the  right  in  quef- 
tion  is  not  a  right  to  ad,  or  do  any  thing,  but  to  have  a  benefit 
conferred.  Indeed,  no  adult  perfon  can  ordinarily  become  a 
member  of  a  church  without  his  own  concurring  act.  And  his 
being  admitted  is  not  fufficient  to  conftitute  him  a  rightful  mem- 
ber, unjcfs  he  has  a  right  to  do  his  part  in  concurrence  with  the 
church.     i3ut  this  will  be  confidered  in  its  proper  place. 

Now  there  is  an  important  difference  between  a  right  to  acV, 
and  a  right  paffively  to  receive  or  be  admitted  to  a  privilege, 
A  right  to  receive,  or  poffefs  a  privilege,  is  the  fame  with  a 
title  to  it.  But  a  right  to  act  is  a  warrant  for  doing  it. 
A  man  may  have  a  good  title  to  privileges,  though  he  neither 
knows  nor  believes  any  thing  of  it.  But  no  one  can  have  a  war- 
rant to  aft  which  will  juitify  him  without  being  confcious  of  it  ? 
All  true  faints  have  a  covenant  title  to  the  privileges  of  the  chil- 
dren of  God,  though  fome  doubt  of  ir,  and  believe  it  not.  But 
no  one  can  have  a  fufficient  warrant  for  doing  any  thing  while  he 
thinks  he  has  not.  Our  title  to  any  benefit  is  not  at  all  invaiivlat- 
ed,  if  we  arc  ever  fo  fully  pcrfuaded  that  it  belongs  not  to  us. 
Uut  a  ivarrant  or  right  to  aui  muff  be  approved  in  the  court  of 
confcicncc. 

Our  title  to  gofpel  privileges  Is  founded  in  the  grant  or  promife 
of  the  new  covenant  to  perfons  qualified,  whether  we  are  confci- 
ous of  having  thefe  qualitications  or  not.  But  a  iiarrant  or  right 
to  a5l  arifcs  from,  and  is  always  annexed  to  a  fufficient  reafon 
for  afiing  in  the  judgment  of  our  own  confcicnce,  when  rightly 
informed.  \i  then  it  be  allced,  who  have  a  right  to  be  admitted 
to  external  communion  with  an  infiituted  church,  the  anfwer 
muft  be,  they  who  have  the  qualifications  to  which,  according  to 
\\\z  gofpel,  a  title  to  the  privilege  of  admiffion  is  annexed.  But 
ifitbcafked,  who  have  a  right  or  warrant  to  come  into  the 
cliurch,  and  take  and  ufe  the  privileges  of  external  communion, 
the  anfwer  will  be,  they  who  have  fufficient  rccjom  fo  to  (\o^  in  the 
judj;incnt  of  their  own  confcicnce  when  rightlv  informed. 

It  is  the  firit  u\'  thefe  enquiries  which  is  now  to  be  attended  to. 
In  anfwer  to  which,  1  would  fay  in  general :  All  and  only  they 
whom  the  church,  by  the  rule  of  the  gcfpel,  may  and  ought  to 
receive,  have  a  right  of  admiffion.    And  all  ought  to  be  received 

who 


The  Right  of  AdnuJJion  inU  the  Church,  ^^ 

^^'ho  exhibit  fufficient  evidence  that  they  are  qualiiied  for  It.  And 
I  take  it  for  granted  by  all,  that  vifible  faints  exhibit  fufficient 
evidence  of  this,  and  {o  have  a  right  of  admiiTion,  except  fome- 
thing  fcandalous  fliould  appear  in  them,  for  which  they  ought  to 
be  debarred.* 

I  (hall  not  now  enquire,  what  caufes  may  be  thought  fufficient 
to  bar  a  vifible  faint  of  his  rig-ht  of  admilTion.     But  ihali  confine 

o 

my  attention  chiefly  to  this  which  feems  to  be  the  mainqueftion. 
Who  arc  vilible  faints  ?     On  which  I  would  obfervc, 

A  vifible  faint  is  a  fubjcvSl  of  that  hollnefs,  or  faintfhip,  zvhicb 
jnay  be  feen  or  difcerned  by  the  church.  He  is  not  only  a  vifible 
pcrfon  who  is  a  faint,  but  it  may  be  feen  that  he  is  a  faint.  This 
is  not  only  vifible  to  God,  and  his  own  eonfcience,  but  alfo  to 
his  fellow  chriPcians. 

We  may  here  take  notice,  that  that  hollnefs  which  forms  the 
charafler  in  queftion  is  a  vifible  qualification.  It  may  be  difcern- 
ed in  another  by  a  due  ufe  of  human  faculties.  But  here  two 
enquiries  occur,  which  will  require  a  careful  attention.  What  is 
that  holinefs  which  is  thus  vifible  ?  And  what  is  the  vlfihility  here 
fuppofed  ?  or,  in  what  fenfe  may  it  be  feen  ? 

It  has  already  been  obferved,  that  there  are  two  forts  of  perfons, 
whofe  real  characters  are  often  very  different,  who  are  in  fcripture 
termed  faints  ;  and  that  there  are  two  kinds  of  holinefs,  which 
give  them  this  denomination.  There  is  an  internal  and  an  ex- 
ternal covenant  dedication  to  God.  An  inward  purity  of  heart, 
and  an  outward  fanctity  exhibited  in  words  and  behaviour.  The 
one  fort  are  faints  outwardly,  the  other  are  faints  inwardly.  This 
diftinftion  is  authorifed  by  the  Apoftle.  *'  He  is  not  a  Jew,  who 
is  one  outwardly  ;  neither  is  that  circumcifion  which  is  outward 
in  the  flefli :  But  he  is  a  Jew  who  is  one  inwardly,  and  circum- 
cifion 

*  This  limitation  feems  necefTary.  Vifible  faints  may  be  fo  ignorant,  or 
erroneous,  or  diforderly  in  their  converration,  as  to  be  unfit  to  haveadtivc 
communion  with  a  church  in  {pecial  ordinances,  till  they  are  cleanfed  from 
thefe  flains  nnd  defilements.  It  is  not  every  blemifh  in  a  man's  char3(5Ver 
wliich  difqiialifies  for  admifllon  into  the  church.  Nor  can  it  be  concluded 
that  a  man  is  n«t  a  vifible  faint  merely  from  his  being  fcandalous,  fo 
as  to  be  at  prefent  unfit  to  be  admitted  to  communion.  There  may  be 
manifeftevidencesof  real  faintfliip,  notwithflandinc;,  and  rational  and  fcrip- 
tural  grounds  for  charity.  We  are  not  bound  to  admit  all  to  communion 
for  whom  we  may  and  ought  to  exercife  charity.  Tiiough  none  fliouldbe 
admitted  but  fuch  as  are  faints  in  the  juft  account  of  the  church,  yet  fome 
who  are  to  be  reputed  faints,  may  yet  be  juHly  debarred.  The  door  of  the 
vifible  chiuxh  is  indeed  fo  wide  tjiat  niany  have  a  right  to  be  admitted, 
who  will  be  excluded  from  the  church  in  heaven.  And  I  trull  that  the 
gate  of  heaven  is  alfo  fo  wide,  that  fome  will  be  received  into  thofe  blifsful 
nianfions  who  were  unfit  to  be  r«»ceiv'.'d  to  external  communion  with  an 
inftituted  church. 


4©  The  Right  of  Jdmiff.on  Into  the  Church, 

cifion  is  that  of  the  heart."  The  Jews  were  faints,  or  a  holy 
people  outvjardly  and  in  the  letter  ;  and  as  fuch  were  tlie  fubje^ts 
of  the  outward  circumcifion,  with  the  other  outward  ordinances, 
and  privileges  of  the  church  under  the  Old  Ttilament.  But  they 
oniy  were  the  fpiritual  feed  of  Abrah.iin,  a  holy  people,  in  that 
more  iirjportnnt  fenfe  which  the  ApolUe  has  in  view,  who  were 
Jews  inwardly,  and  circumcifed  in  heart.  Now  fince  external 
and  internal  holinefs  are  different  qualifications,  and  an  outward 
anti  an  inward  faint  are  different  characters,  the  queAion  is,  what 
kind  ut  holinefs  inu/l  be  vifible  to  the  church  in  anv  one,  to  de- 
nominate hiin  a  viliblc  faint  ?  Is  it  external,  or  internal  faintlliip, 
which  mull  be  vi/ible^  to  give  him  a  light  of  admiffion  ? 

But  before  we  proceed  to  the  refolution  of  this  point,  it  will 
be  needful  to  explain  and  ftate  what  we  mean  by  the  vifihll'ity  of 
holinefs  or  faintfliip :  Or  in  what  fenfe,  the  qualifications  which 
form  and  difcriminatc  the  character  of  a  vifible  faint  may  he  jeen, 

i\x\  object  is  faid  to  be  vifible  in  the  ftritfteft  fenfe  when  it  may 
be  feen,  or  perceived  by  the  eye.  But  as  we  commonly  ex- 
piefs  the  faculties,  afts  or  operations  of  the  mind  in  terms  and 
phrafes  borrowed  from  bodily  and  fcnfible  things,  fo  things  are 
faid  to  be  vifible  to  the  mind,  when  they  may  in  any  w  ay  be  dif- 
cerned  or  known  by  us.  And  the  feveral  inlets  of  the  mind  thro' 
which  it  receives  its  information  are  figuratively  termed  the  eyes 
of  the  mind,  by  w  hich  it  fees  objects.  Senfible  objects  are  faid 
to  be  vifibie  to  the  eye  of  fenfe.  Some  truths  are  immediately  vifi- 
ble, or  felf-evident  to  the  eye  of  the  mind  as  foon  as  they  are  clear- 
ly underftood.  Some  truths  are  vifible  to  the  eye  ofreafon^  as  being 
demonfirable  from  the  difcernable  connection  they  have  with  fomc 
known  truth.  Tlius  the  being  of  the  invifible  God  may  be  clear- 
ly Jeen  from  the  works  of  creation.  Some  truths  are  vifible  to  the 
iye  of  fait h^  being  confirmed  by  the  tefiimony  of  Gcd.  Thus 
Abrahnm  by  faith/mc  the  day  of  Chrilt  afar  off,  and  was  glad. 
But  let  it  be  oblerved,  that  nothing  is  vifible,  properly  fpeaking, 
but  what  is  true  and  real.  That  which  is  not,  cannot  be  feen, 
either  immediately,  or  by  means  of  any  fure  connection,  with  any 
other  truth,  if  the  evidence  we  have  of  liiecxificncc  of  arvy  thing 
leaves  ii  doubtful  whether  the  thing  fuppofed  has  any  exifiencc^ 
if  we  can  only  form  a  conjectural  opinion  from  it,  it  would  be,  I 
think,  a  harlh  carnchrefis  to  fay  that  it  was  an  object  that  could 
be  feen  by  us.  If  we  have  not  light  enough  to  afcertain  the  real- 
ity of  a  fuppofetl  object,  there  is  not  enough,  to  n»ake  it  vifible. 

Now,  if  nothing  be  vifible,  but  what  may  be  feen,  and  if  notic- 
ing can  be  feen,  iinlcfs  there  bo  light  enough  to  afcertain  its  reali- 
ty i  it  fcc.^ls  to  be  at  Icart  an  improper  way  of  fpcaking  to  oppofc 

a  vifibk 


The  Right  of  JdmtJJion  into  the  Church.  41 

a  vifible  faint  to  a  real  one,  as  was  before  obferved.     How  that 
can  be  feen  which  Is  not,  or  whofe  reality  cannot  be  difcerned,  I    * 
iindcrftand  not. 

But  if  a  viable  fiint  be  one  who  may  be  feen  to  be  a  faint,  if 
vifible  holinefs  be  holinefs  vv'hich  may  be  feen^  and  whofe  reality 
may  be  afcertained,  it  is  evident  that  it  is  external,  and  not  inter- 
nal holinefs  which  forms  the  character  of  a  vifible  faint,  as  fuch. 
It  is  the  vifibility  of  this,  and  not  of  inward  fanftlfication,  which 
gives  a  right  of  admiiTion   into  the  church. 

For  it  is  external  holinefs  alone  which  is  vifible,  according  io 
the  explanation  which  has  been  given.  Holinefs  of  heart  is  an 
invidble  qualification,  as  is  generally  taught  in  the  reformed 
churches.  It  is  the  ornament  of  the  hidden  man  of  the  heart  : 
A  new  name,  which  no  man  knoweth  but  he  who  receiveth  it  : 
It  can  be  feen  by  him  only  who  can  fearch  the  heart.  It  cannot 
be  difcerned  in  another  by  the  eye  of  fenfe,  by  immediate  intuiti- 
on, by  reafon,  or  by  faith.  Its  reality  cannot  be  made  vifible,  or 
afcertained  by  any  evidence  we  can  have  accefs  to.  It  has  not  a 
known,  and  certain  conne^lion  with  any  thing  difcernable  by  us. 
Now,  if  inward  holinefs  be  not  vifible  to  the  eye  of  man  ;  then 
it  cannot  be  the  vifibility  of  this  which  gives  any  one  the  title  of  a 
vifible  faint,  and  a  right  of  admiffion.  Nor  is  there  any  fuch 
character  as  a  'v'fible  faint  i?i  heart.  To  fpeak  of  one  as  being  vifi- 
bly,  that  is,  outwardly  gracious,  circumcifed  in  heart,  feems  to  be 
as  improper,  as  it  would  be  to  fay  that  he  was  vifibly  polleft  of  an 
invifible  qualification.  It  muft  be  the  vifibility  of  that  holinefs 
which  is  vifible,  that  is,  of  external  holinefs,  which  denominates 
a  vifible  faint,  and  qualifies  for  admifiion  to  external  church  com- 
munion. 

Some  have  thought  that  there  is  but  one  fort  of  holinefs,  or 
faints  fpoken  of  in  fcripture.*  But  if  there  be  any  fuch  charafler 
as  a  vifible  faint,  if  that  holinefs  v^hich  forms  this  chara<fler,  be  a 
vifible  qualification  ;  on  the  contrary,  if  that  which  forms  the  cha- 
racter of  a  faint  in  heart  is  not  a  vifible  qualification,  I  fee  not  hov/ 
it  can  be  denied  that  there  are  two  kinds  of  holinefs,  and  faints.  If 
the  fcripture  gives  the  title  of  faints  to  fome  who  are  not  faints  in 
heart,  and  if  the  fcriptures  do  not  give  titles  to  any  which  do  not 
belong  to  them  ;  then  there  are  two  forts  of  petfons  to  v\hom  the 
title  of  faints  truly  belongs.  Indeed  we  are  apt  enough  to  mif- 
call  things  through  ignorance  or  mifiake  ;  but  the  holy  Spirit, 
by  whofe  infpiration  the  fcriptures  were  given,  is  not  fubjedt  to 
our  weakncfics. 

A  vifible  faint  is  a  real  definite  character,  effentially  different 
from  that  of  a  faint  in  heart.     And   fuch   are  entitled  to  fome 

fpccial 

^^Tt  might  as  well  have  been  faid,  that  one  forf  of  Jews  only  v.-?.s  l^-cken 
of,  an^i  one  kind  of  cifninic^f/^'n,  even  that  of  the  licurt. 

Y 


42  The  Right  of  JJmiJJion  into  the  Church, 

fpecial  privileges,  to  which  a  faint  in  heart,  as  fuch,  is  not  ad' 
mifliblc.  It  is  true,  thefc  different  eharacters  often  meet  in  the 
fame  fubjeft  ;  but  they  often  are  alfo  feparated.  And  an  out- 
"ward  faii^t  is  as  really  a  fiint  in  liiskind,  as  an  inward  one.  The 
unrcgcneraie  cliild  of  a  believer  is  as  really  a  fubject  of  external 
federal  holinefs,  as  the  believer  himfelf  is  of  inward  fanctifying 
grace  ;  and  the  one  is  as  rightful  a  member  of  the  vifible,  as  the 
oihor  is  of  the  invifible  church. 

In  Hiort,  if  the  notion  of  vifibility  has  been  rightly  ftated,  if 
nothing  is  viiibic  but  what  can  be  leen,  and  nothinj^  can  be  feen 
imkfs  there  be  light  or  evidence  enough  to  afcertain  its  real  ex- 
iPicnce  \  it  fcems  plain  that  it  is  not  inward,  but  outward  holinefs 
\\hich  can  be  izzn  in  another,  and  which  denominates  him  a  vifi- 
biC  faint. 

Here  it  may  probably  be  faid,  that  a  tiding  may  be  fald  to 
be  vifible,  *in  fome  {tn^c^  if  it  ^ppc^r  probahk,  or  credible,  though 
there  (liould  be  no  certainty  of  its  reality.  And  that  grace  may 
be  faid  to  be  vijwle  in  this  i^rSt.  'I'l'icre  may  be  evidence  fuffi- 
cient  to  make  it  vifible  to  the  eye  or  judgment  of  rational  charity^  that 
a  perfon  is  a  faint  in  heart,  though  it  be  not  fufficient  to  make  it 
certain  that  he  is  really  fuch  a  one.  And  it  is  the  vifibility  of 
inward  fan'titication  to  the  eye  of  charity,  by  the  light  of  proba- 
ble, though  uncertain  evidence,  which  gives  one  the  denon'ina- 
lion  of  a  vihble  faint :  So  that  the  holinefs  fuppofed  is  holinefs  of 
heart.  But  its  being  vifible,  does  not  mean  that  it  can  certainly 
be  feen  or  known  to  be  real,  but  only  that  it  is  probable  or  cred- 
ible, wiiich  in  the  account  of  charity,  is  fatisfaclory  evidence  of 
its  truth  or  reality. 

As  1  would  willingly  wave  ncedlefs  difputcs  about  words,  I 
fliall  only  fay,  that  if  qualihcations  may  be  faid  to  be  vifible,  of 
wiiofe  reality  we  are  uncertain,  it  muli  be  in  a  lefs  proper  fenle. 
Uncertain  evidence  may  difcover  the  poUibiiity,  credibility,  or 
probability  that  a  thing  exirts  j  but  the  thing  itfelf,  its  real  exill- 
ence  cannot  a6iually  be  feen,  fo  is  not  properly  vifible,  without 
more  light.  I  grant  there  may  be  vifible  anil  lufficient  evidence 
of  the  probability,  or  cie(!.bility  of  a  man's  being  a  faint  in  heart  ; 
and  ihat  in  the  eye  or  judgment  of  charity,  he  is  to  be  reunited, 
atid  received  as  if  he  were  lucli.  And  we  may  fay  that  he  is  vfi- 
I'j  luch  a  one  to  tlie  eye  of  charity.  But  in  reality,  nothing 
inon-  is  or  can  be  feen  th:.n  external  (igns  or  evidences  of  grace, 
V. hich  arc  known  to  bo  uncerrr>in.  'J  he  rule  and  evidence  by 
v^•hich  haiity  is  to  jiidgc,  are  dcfigned  to  diredt  chriilians  how 
they  are  to  rcgnrd  and  behave  tcjwards  nun  in  this  world  ;  but 
not  to  cn.il)le  ihem  to  Icarch  and  know  what  is  in  the  hearts  ot 
each  otiur. 

Whether 


The  Right  df  AdmrJfioH  into  the  Church,  4,3 

Whether  then  we  fay  that  outward  holinefs  forms  the  charac- 
ter of  a  vifible  faint ;  or  that  it  is  the  vifibility  of  inward  fanctiti- 
cation  in  tlie  eye  of  charity  which  gives  one  this  denominaricn,  it 
comes  to  the  fame  thing.  For  outward  holinefs  is  the  evidence, 
the  only  evidence  of  grace  which  the  eye  of  charity  can  difcern. 
It  gives  inward  fandiifi^^hon  all  the  vifibility  it  has  in  the  view 
of  the  church.  Every  outward  faint  is  to  be  reputed  a  faint  in 
heart,  judging  of  him  by  the  rule  of  charity,  though  we  doubt 
not  but  many  fuch  will  be  found  to  have  been  really  hypocrites. 
But  the  judgment  of  charity  will  be  further  confulered  hereafter. 

There  is  yet  a  third  notion  of  vifibility  which  requires  to  be  no- 
ticed. Vifibility  is  fuppcfed  to  be  the  fame  with  the  appearing  of 
a  thing  to  us,  to  our  apprehenfiOn,  judgment  and  efteem.  A  vif* 
ible  faint  is  one  who  feems,  and  is  judged  by  the  church  to  be  a 
faint  in  heart.     And  fuch  only  ought  to  be  admitted  by  them. 

But  i  conceive  that,  to  be  a  viiible  faint,  is  a  very  different 
thing,  from  his  feeming,  appearing,  or  being  judged,  or  eileem- 
ed  by  others  tiD  be  a  faint  in  any  fenfe.  It  is  one  thing  to  fay 
that  a  thing  can  be  fcen  by  us,  and  anotlier  to  fay  that  it  k  fecn, 
or  appears,  or  feems  to  us.  Viiible  faintfhip  is  a  qualification  0/ 
the  Jubje^i,  which  maybe  difcerned  by  another.  13ut  the  appear- 
ance one  makes  in  the  eye  or  viev;  of  another,  is  nothing  but  the 
epprehenfion,  judgment  or  opinion  of  him  who  thus  judges.  A  man 
may  be  a  vifible  faint,  though  he  may  not  fo  appear,  or  fcem,  or 
be  judged  by  the  church.  And  he  may  feem,  and  appear,  and 
be  judged  by  them  to  be  a  faint  when  he  is  no  faint  in  any  fenfe. 
If  the  eye  or  judgment  be  not  faulty  or  irregular,  a  vifible  faint 
only  will  feem,  appear  and  be  judged  to  be  an  external  faint,  and 
reputed  a  faint  in  heart  in  the  judgment  of  charity. 

But  it  is  the  dijcernable  qitalifuations  of  a  perfon,  and  not  the 
difceryimcnt  of  the  church,  not  the  appearance  he  has  in  their  eye^ 
not  the  idea,  or  notion  they  may  have  of  him,  whether  light  or 
wrong,  which  confhtutes  a  vifible  faint,  and  gives  a  right  of  ad- 
miffion.  The  reafon  why  one  appears,  or  feems  to  another  to 
be  fuch  a  perfon,  may  be  prejudice,  partiality,  judging  by  3 
wrong  rule.  But  can  any  think  that  our  right  to  chriftian  privi- 
leges depends  on  thefe  things  ?  Whoever  exhibits,  or  holds  up 
to  view  external  holinefs,  cr,  which  is  the  fame  thing,  credible 
fufficient  evidence  according  to  the  gofpel  that  he  ought  to  be 
charitably  reputed  and  received  for  a  true  faint,  fuch  a  one  is  a 
vifible  faint,  and  has  a  right  of  admi/lion,  however  he  may  feem 
or  appear  to  any.  It  is  not  the  apprehenfions  of  others,  but  the 
qualihcatjons  of  the  proponant,  or  the  fuftkient  evidences  in  hij 
favour,  duly  exhibited  which  give  hiin  a  right. 

We 


44  7'/\'  Right  of  MniJJhn  into  the  Church, 

Wc  mufl  not  then  confound  the  vifibility  of  an  objc(5\  with  the 
fenfc  of  the  beholder,  or  with  the  apprchcnfion  cr  judgment  he 
forms  cf  it.  U"  this  be  confidcrcd,  1  think  it  is  not  true  to  fay 
that  to  be  a  vifihlc  faint  is  the  fame  as  to  appear  to  be  a  real  faint 
in  the  eye  that  beholds.  That  none  ought  to  be  admitted  but 
thofe  who  appear,  and  arc  judged  to  be  true  faints,  ^hot  it  is 
needful  that  a  church  have  charity  for  one,  or  fuch  a  favorable 
notion  of  him,  in  order  to  their  receiving  him,  or  having  a  right 
or  warrant  to  receive  him.  It  is  indeed  the  duty  cf  the"  church 
to  judge  charitably  of  all  who  exliihit  external  holinefs.  Thcfc 
have  a  right  to  the  charity  of  the  church,  as  well  as  to  be  receiv- 
ed to  communion.  But  furely,  a  church  having  charity  for  one 
is  not  what  makes  it  their  duty  to  receive  him.  They  ought  to 
receive  all  for  whom  they  ought  to  have  charity  (except  fome 
accidental  bar  lie  in  the  way.)  And  they  ought  to  have  charity 
for  all  who  hold  forth  fufficient  fcriptural  grounds  for  it.  And 
external  holinefs,  according  to  the  gofpel  rule,  is  fuch  evidence  of 
inward  fandiiic:;tion  as  gives  fafiicicnt  grounds  for  a  judgment  of 
charity. 


SECTION     11. 

^le  V'lfwiTiiy  cf  invjari  SanHficat'ion^  and  the  judgment  of  Char U^ 
further  opcmd  and  jiated, 

AS  it  is  by  means  of  light  that  outward  objcifis  are  viHble  to 
the  eye,  fo  it  is  by  means  of  evidence  that  the  mind  can  difcern 
what  is  truth,  with  refpe£l  to  thofe  obje<^ls  about  which  it  is  oc- 
cu{)ied.      "  Whatfocvcr  doth  make  manifcft  is  light." 

Though  nothing  is  properly  vifible  but  what  can  be  certainly 
fcen,  and  To  really  exifts  ;  yet  fuch  are  the  relations  and  connex- 
ions which  things  have  among  thcmfclves,  that  wc  may,  from 
the  things  which  are  imnhduUtly  fccn,  be  certain  that  ether  things 
cxifl ;  and  alfo  that  it  is  prcbahlc^  credible^  or  pojfhle^  that  other 
things  arc,  cr  will  be,  of  whofc  exillence  yet  we  cannot  be  fure. 
And  though  wc  cannot  be  certain  of  the  reality  of  thcfe,  yet  the 
prohahillty^  craidility  or  pnjfibility  cf  them  may  be  known  and 
plainly  perceived. 

As  we  have  no  certain  evidence  of  Inward  fan^^ification  in  an- 
other, no  more  can  be  difcerned  than  fallible  figns,  which  give  us 
rcafon  to  hope,  and  judge  it  probable  or  credible,  that  fuch  a  one 
is  a  faint  in  Iieart.  This  is  all  the  vifibility  which  grace  has  in 
the  eye  of  ch?.rity.  And  the  judgment  mu(\  keep  pace  with  the 
evidence  on  which  it  is  grounded.  The  one  is  as  doubtful  as 
ihe  other, 

>Vhocv€^ 


The  Right  of  AdmiJJion  into  the  Church.  4'^ 

Whoever  exhibits  external  holinefs,  exhibits  ail  l!ie  evkknce 
jof  inward  fanaification  which  one  mia  can  difcern  in  anoiher. 
And  though  this  does  not  make  it  certain  that  the  fubjed  is  a 
true  faint,  yet  he  is  certainly  a  vifible  faint.  And  the  rule  of  the 
gofpel,  according  to  which  the  judgment  of  charity  is  formed, 
requires  that  every  vifible  Taint  be  reputed,  received  and  loved, 
as  a  true  difciple  of  Chrift.  When  a  man  is  admitted  into  the 
church  as  a  vifible  faint,  he  is  admitted  as  one  who  gives  credi- 
ble evidence  that  he  is  a  faint  in  heart,  and  is  by  the  rule  of 
charitable  judgment  to  be  reputed. 

The  judgment  of  charity  in  favour  of  any  one  is  not  an  ahfi- 
kite  judgment  that  he  is  certainly  fincere  ;  but  only  that  he  exhib- 
itf  marks  or  evidences  of  it.     And  therefore,  according  to   the 
gofpel  rule,  is  to  be  fo  accounted,  reputed   and  received.     But 
it  is  ftill  undenlood  that  the  rule  and  evidence  upon  which  th^ 
judgment  of  charity  is  formed,  leave  room  for  doubt,  whether  a 
great  part  of  thofe  who  are  to  be  thus  reputed,  may  not  be  un- 
found.     To  repute  one  a  good  man,  according  to  tlie  common 
acceptation  of  the  word,  is  not  the  fame  as  abfoluteiy  to  believe 
that  he  is  fo ;  but  it  is  to  prefume  that  he  is,  and  carry  ourfelves 
towards  him  as  if  he  were  fuch.     Every  one   is  to  be  reputed 
honeft,  fo  long  as  he  behaves  viflbly  in  confiltency  with  fuch  a 
charaa-er.     And  yet  when  we  confider  how  many  who  have  fuf- 
tained  fuch  a  chara^er  for  a  time  have  forfeited   it  and  become 
infamous  ;  it  would  be  an  irrational  credulity  abfoluteiy  to  believe 
every  man  to  be  honed  who  is  of  a  blamelefs  converfation.     So 
every  vifible  faint  is  to  be  reputed  a   true  faint  in  charitable  ac- 
count.    And  the  judgment  of  charity  is  rational,  while  it  pro- 
ceeds according  to  the  rule  and  evidence  upon  which  it  is  to  be 
formed,  though  we  know  that  this   rule  and  evidence  give  no 
certain  difcovery  of  the  inward  charaaer,  and  fpiritual  ilate  of 
men.     Nor  are  we  required   abfoluteiy  to  believe  further  than 
there  is  fubftantial  evidence  to  fupport  us.     And  there  are  many 
of  whom  we  have  no  reafon  to  doubt  but  that  they  are  vifible  faints, 
and  to  be  reputed  and  received  as  true  faints,  while  yet  vve  may 
have  reafon  to  doubt  whether  they  are  fincere,  and  to  be  jealous 
over  them  with  a  godly  jealoufy. 

It  belongs  not  to  the  judgment  of  charity  to  determine,  ^hzt 
degree  of  evidence  external  holinefs  aflbrds  of  the  reality  of  in- 
wa^rd  fan^ification.  We  know  that  it  leaves  us  in  uncertainty  : 
It  does  not  exceed  probability.  But  whether  it  amounts  to  a 
preponderant  probability,  I  think  cannot  be  known,  unlefs  wc 
could  know  whether  the  greater  part  of  vifible  faints  were  fincere. 
If  this  were  fuppofed,  thc^ probability  would  preponderate  in  fa- 
vour of  each  particular  perfan.  There  would  be  more  rcalon  to 
'•   ■  ■      •  '  •  hops 


4-^  T'A^  Right  of  Adfjv.Jfion  into  the  Church, 

hope  he  is  fincere,  than  to  fear  the  contrary.  Hut  if  it  were  fup- 
poicJ  ihat  the  greater  part  of  vifible  faints  arc  not  fincere,  the 
probability  would  preponderate  againrt  the  feveral  individuals. 
But  though  it  may  be  known  who  are  vifible  faints,  yet  we  know 
not  what  proportion  of  thefe  arc  fmcere.  For  ou-^ht  that  we 
know,  the  greater  part  of  tliofe  who  give  the  lowcll:  evidences  of 
fanclificatron  may  be  faints  in  heart  ;  and  we  know  not  bat  that 
the  greater  part  of  thofe  who  give  the  bell  evidences  of  their 
fincerity  may  be  hypocrites. 

If  wc  cannot  know  whether  one  is  a  vi.Gble  faint,  till  we  know 
v/hether  tliere  be  a  preponderant  probability  that  he  is  fincere,  I 
think  we  fliall  never  be  able  to  determine  this  till  the  day  of 
judgment. 

'i'his,  I  imagine,  will  found  like  a  paradox  to  fome  :  But  let 
it  be  examined.  1  afk  then,  what  external  evidences  can  be  de- 
pended on  as  a  proof  that  it  is  moli  probable  a  perfon  is  a  faint  in 
heart.  Let  a  fcriptural  rule,  with  marks,  belaid  down,  by  which 
this  may  he  determined,  and  it  (hall  be  attended  to.  For  my 
part  I  know  of  none.  And  if  the  fcriptures  will  not  furnilh  us 
with  rules  and  marks  by  which  it  can  be  known  which  way  the 
probability  preponderates  in  this  cafe,  much  \z{s  can  experience 
and  observation  help  us  to  them.  1  here  are  fome  profefTors 
indeed  wlio  commend  the-nfelves  much  to  our  charity.  But  who 
can  fay  how  many  of  thefe  may  be  unfound  ?  There  are  others 
v.ho  appear  to  us  not  to  adorn  their  profelFion  as  they  ought : 
They  have  fcandalous  blemifhcs  in  their  cha.acler.  But  how 
many  of  thefe  may,  notwiihflanding,  be  the  fubjeils  of  fanctify, 
ing  grace,  we  (hall  never  know  till  the  day  of  revelation.  Jf  wc 
have  no  rule  by  wliich  we  can  polfibly  determine  whether  the 
evidence  in  favour  of  any  one  amounts  to  a  preponderant  proba- 
bility, how  vain  muft  it  be  to  pretend  to  make  this  the  meafure 
aful  flandard  of  vifible  faintlhip?  Or  muft  this  be  determined  by 
the  mere  conjedures  of  cliriftians,  undireckd  by  any  rule,  or  by 
fuch  arbitrary  ones  as  they  may  form  to  themfclves  ?  This  no 
one  will  pretend.  J  conceive  then,  it  is  as  impolFible  for  us  to 
fay,  upon  any  certain  grounds,  what  vifjble  figns  of  grace  maka 
it  more  probable  that  any  one  is  a  true  faint,  as  it  would  be  to 
fay  what  outward  marks  would  make  this  certain.  W^hat  per- 
pk-xiug  doubt  muft  we  be  in,  if  we  make  it  a  rule  to  admit  none 
litto  tiie  church  till  he  exhibits  fuch  evidences  of  linccrity  as  for 
the  mol}  part  fail  not  ?  When  we  know  not  whether  any  vifible 
qualifications  make  it  probable,  in  this  knic,  ih.it  any  one  is  fin- 
ccrc ;  andean  only  guefs  at  random,  or  according  to  our  own 
fancy  i  and  arc  never  like  to  know,  as  long  as  v>c  live,  whether 
wc  have  gucflcd  right  in  d,ny  one  iulUiK^J. 


Thu   Right  of  Ahmjjlon   into  the  Church,  47 

But  though  we  know  not  whether  the  greater  part  of  the  vifi- 
ble  faints  are  fincere,  whether  external  holinefs  be  a  preponder- 
ant probable  evidence  of  grace  in  general,  or  in  any  particular 
inibnces,  yet  if  we  attend  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpcl  we  may  know 
whoare  vinble  faints,  and  that  they  are  all  to  be  reputed,  receiv- 
ed, and  loved  as  the  true  difciples  of  Chrift.  This  is  the  judg- 
ment of  charity  ;  which  without  intruding  into  fecret  tiiings 
which  belong  to  God,  or  indulging  precarious  conjeifiures  Vv'itha 
ra(h  curiofity,  proceeds  all  along  upon  fafe  and  fure  grounds. 
We  judge  according  to  the  rule  and  evidence  though  we  know 
that  this  rule  was  not  given,  to  enable  us  exaRly  to  dillinguifh  be- 
tween true  faints  and  hypocrites,  or  to  determine  whether  the  vifi- 
ble  church  is  chiefly  made  up  of  the  former  or  the  latter  of  thefe 
charaaers  ;  or  whether  the  evidence  of  inward  fandtificalion 
which  arifes  from  external  holinefs  amounts  to  a  preponderating 
probability. 

Some  indeed  give  much  greater  evidence  of  fincerlty  than 
ethers  ;  ana  we  may  fay  in  a  comparative  view,  that  it  is  more 
probable  that  an  exemplary  prof<^iror  is  fincere  than  one  who  does 
not  adorn  hi%  profeffion.  But  to  fay  abfolutely  that  it  is,  or  is 
not  moft  probable  on  the  whole  that  either  the  one  or  the  other 
is,  or  is  not  fincer©,  is,  1  think  what  we  have  no  rule,  or  fufficient 
evidence  to  warrant  us  to  do. 

I  might  add,  that  if  it  were  known  in  general  (which  it  is  not) 
that  the  greateft  part  of  vifible  faints  are  in  fincere,  or  if  that 
were  fuppofed,  which  fome  have  too  rafhly  aflerted,  that  not  more 
than  one  in  ten  were  faints  in  heart,  and  confequently  that  out- 
ward holinefs  was  not  fo  much  as  a  probable  evidence,  (in  the 
common  acceptation  of  the  phrafe)  yet  charity  and  equity  too 
would  oblige  us  to  repute  and  treat  each  vifible  faint  as  a  good 
man.  For  furely  it  would  be  contrary  to  all  equity  as  well  as 
charity  to  judge  and  treat  any  individual,  as  a  wicked  man,  while 
nothing  appears  in  him  which  would  prove  liim  to  be  of  fuch  a 
character,  though  it  were  ever  fo  certain  that  the  greater  part  were 
wicked.  We  may  have  reafon  to  think  that  the  greater  part  of 
mankind  is  vicious;  yet  each  individual  is  to  be  prefumed  and 
reputed  to  be  hoHcft,  till  the  contrary  appears.  If  this  be  thought 
an  unreafoi^able  rule  of  judging,  1  would  afk  whether  it  would  be 
a  better  rule  not  to  have  charity  for  a  vifible  fiint  or  admit  him 
to  the  connnunion  of  the  church  hecaufe  there  arcfo  many  hypo- 
crites that  the  preponderant  probability  isagainA  each  one  in  par- 
ticular ?   Would  this  favour  of  charity,  or  of  equity  ? 

In  judging  of  any  one  t,       ■)  law   of  charity  we  are  to  judge 
merclv  frym  what^appears  in  hi?n,  and  not  from  what  has  appeared 


^8  The  Right  of  Adm'ijjion  into  the  Church, 

in  others^  how  mnny  focvcr,  who  have  dcflroycd  tl.e  credit  of  ail 
evidences  in  their  favour  which  once  appeared  in  them.  Proba- 
bilities or  prefuinplions,  ol' an  unfavourable  afpc(ft  towards  pro- 
fdiions  in  general  are  not  admitted  as  evidence  againfl  an  indivi- 
dual. 'I'he  vifib'.e  defection  of  lb  many  who  once  were  vifibie 
faints  has  induced  fome  to  think,  that  mueh  the  greater  part  arc 
not  (incerc,  as  has  been  faid  j  and  it  may  well  awaken  our  fears 
for  ourfelves  and  others,  leit  after  having  had  a  place  in  the  vifible 
church  we  ihouM  have  our  hnal  portion  with  hypocrites  and  un- 
believers. But  tiie  luJe  of  charity  allows  us  not  to  think  evil  of 
any,  or  judge  unfavourably  of  them,  for  the  t'^iults  of  others. 

Notwithllanding  what  has  been  faid,  1  grant  that  the  evidences 
of  fmcerity  which  fome  exhibit  greatly  overbalance  whatever  /';; 
ihem  may  have  an  unfavourable  afpCvSt.  When  in  judging  of  the 
eharasSter  of  a  profefibr,  wc  have,  as  the  rule  of  charity  requires, 
laid  afide  all  prcfumptions  or  probabilities  arifing  from  the  falling 
away  of  fo  mr.ny  in  the  day  of  temptation,  (which  miglit  render 
the  intcrrrity  of  each  individual  fufpected)  and  cliimate  his  chi- 
ratSter  m'erely  from  what  is  vifible  in  him^  it  may  be  very  plain, 
that  he  gives  more  evidence  of  finceiity  than  hy^crify.  And 
we  might  fay  fro?n  what  ii  vifible  in  him^  it  appears  mort  probable 
that  he  isfincerc.  And  I  think  ncne  ought  to  be  accounted  vifi- 
ble faints  in  ivhoni  there  are  not  vifibly  preponderant  grounds  of 
hope.  And  yet  if  it  could  be  proved  from  the  fcriptures,  or  from 
cbfcrvp.tion,  that  the  greater  part  of  credible  profeitors  endure  not 
to  the  end,  but  are  only  temporary  believers,  this  would  turn  the 
balance  of  probability  the  other  way,  when  the  whole  evidence 
was  collcfted  and  fummed  up  from  every  quarter. 

Indeed,  as  was  faid  before,  I  know  not  but  that  the  grenteft 
part  of  vifd)le  faints  may  be  Cncere.  What  proportion  of  them 
is  converted  we  arc  unable  to  determine.  Arid  I  think  v.c  had 
better  not  pretend  to  form  and  give  out  our  conjeclures  and  opin- 
ions upon  matters  of  which  wc  are  fo  ignorant,  or  vainly  pry  into 
(jod's  fccrcts.  However,  there  is  no  inconfillcncy  in  fuppofing 
that  there  may  be  greater  evidences  of  fmcerity  than  of  hypocrify 
in  eachvfi'c'Icjftinty  though  it  were  at  the  fame  tinie  fuppolcd  that 
the  areater  p;irt  are  hypocrites.  For  the  evidence  wc  may  have 
of  the  hypocrify  of  others,  how  many  f^ever,  appears  not  in  thcfe 
of  whom  wc  judge  charitably.  It  is  collected  from  dilierent  quar- 
ters ;  and  is  not  the  evidence  upon  which  thejudgiDcni  of  chari- 
ty proceeds. 

It  may  be  a.^cd,  can  tlierc  be  a  vifibility  without  and  againft 
probability?  Or  c::n  lliat  be  pf^^^^^le  which  there  is  rcafon  to 
thii.k  is  iTiorc  liUl}  not  to  be  iri''    "^  J  anfwer — There  muft  be 

more 


Tlje  Right  of  Admijfion  Into  the  Church,  4^ 

more  than  probability,  even  certainty  of  the  reality  of  whatever 
is  properly  vifible.  And  fince  we  have  no  certain  evidence  of  the 
reality  of  inward  fan6liiication  in  another,  it  is  commonly  held  to 
bean  invifible  qualification. 

But  if  we  take  the  vifibllity  of  fan£lifying  grace  in  that  impro- 
per fenfe  in  which  only  the  notion  can  be  admitted,  it  means  no 
more  than  fuch  uncertain  evidence  as  the  judgment  of  charity  is 
grounded  upon  ;  which  makes  it  not  only  probable,  but  certain 
that  the  perfon  who  exhibits  it  is  to  be  reputed,  received  and  treat- 
ed as  a  difciple  of  Chrift.  But  whether  the  greater  part  of  thofe 
who  hold  forth  this  evidence  are  difciples  indeed,  and  fo  whether 
this  vifibility  amounts  to  a  preponderant  probability,  we  are  not 
able  to  determine.  And  if  it  be  thought  improper  to  term  that 
evidence  probable^  which  may  yet  be  fuppofed  to  fail  in  moft  in- 
ftances  ;  I  am  not  concerned  to  defend  the  propriety  of  ufing  the 
phrafein  this  manner;  a  phrafe  not  found  in  the  fcriptures  in  any 
fenfe,  but  coined  in  the  fchools.  But  this  fenfe,  however  impro- 
per it  may  feem,  is,  I  conceive,  the  only  fenfe  in  which  it  can  be 
truly  faid  that  inward  fandtiiication  is  vifible  to  the  eye  of  charity 
by  probable  figns  or  evidences  ;  fince  we  know  not  how  often 
thefe  figns  may  fail. 

But  would  it  not  be  foolifh  and  contrary  to  common  fenfe  for 
a  prince  to  admit  thofe  into  his  houfhold  and  armies  who  he  has 
reafon  to  think  may  be  enemies  and  traitors  ?  Can  it  then  be  ra- 
tionally fuppofed  that  the  rule  of  admiflion  into  the  church  is 
fuch,  as  that  more  unconverted  perfons,  enemies  in  heart,  may  be 
regularly  admitted,  than  true  converts  ? 

I  anfwer.  It  is  certain  that  the  rule  of  admiflion  is  fuch,  that 
fome,  yea  many  unfanftified  perfons  may  be,  and  are  regularly 
admitted.  All  the  congregation  of  Ifrael  wereadmitted,  or  (which 
is  to  the  fame  effcB:)  recognized  as  members  of  the  vifible  church 
by  God  himfelf  at  mount  Sinai  :  Yet  who  can  fay  that  one  in 
ten  of  them  were  faints  in  heart  ?  The  children  of  believers  are 
all  reputed  faints,  and  as  fuch  have  a  right  of  admilllon;  yet  we 
are  not  fure  that  the  greater  part  of  them  are  inwardly  fan£rificd 
from  the  womb,  or  even  afterwards.  Nay,  it  is  not  doubted  but 
that  many,  no  one  knows  how  many,  credible  profefibrs,  who 
muft  beadmiited  according  to  the  rule,  are  unconverted.  And 
if  this  feems  to  us  a  foolilh  rule,  which  will  be  likely  to  operate 
to  the  great  danger  and  detriment  of  the  church,  by  filling  it  with 
members  inimical  to  its  true  interests,  let  it  be  remembered  how- 
ever that  it  is  the  foolininefs  of  God,  v^'hieh  is  wifer  than  men, 
whofe  ways  and  thoughts  are  high  above  ours,  as  the  heavens  are 

G  It 


5D  The  Right  of  Adm'iJJloH  into  the  Omrcb. 

It  is  v.enk  indeed  to  argue  ngainll  the  v.irdom  and  firnefs  0^2 
rule  of  adminion  into  tlie  church,  becaufe  it  would  be  iir.pro- 
p^jr  to  be  obferved  by  a  prince  in  forming  his  army,  or  family.  A 
prince  would  not  willingly  have  any  w):->  are  not  really  as  well  as 
fecminsly  loyal.  Hut  it  is  the  will  of  L-^'d  that  many  be  admit- 
ted into  the  church  who  are  not  in  heart  friends  to  him.  And  if 
the  greater  part  be  of  this  character,  can  we  imagine  that  the  true 
interelis  of  Chrifi's  kingdom  arc  in  any  danger,  while  Chrift  h.us 
)iis  enemies  as  much  in  his  power  as  any,  and  can  ufe  them  as 
his  inftruments,  or  rellrain  them,  or  make  them  his  willing  pco* 
pic,  or  cut  them  off,  whenever  he  pleafcs? 

VV^c  may  imagine  it  v^ould  be  bell:  to  have  a  rule,  by  which  we 
n^ii^^ht  he  able  to  diAinguKh  characters  fo  far  at  Icaii,  as  to  Iccurc 
a  good  majority  of  true  faints  in  every  church.  And  i  know  not 
but  we  have  fuch  a  rule  :  Nay  i  believe  we  have,  if  fuch  a  rule  be 
bell.  Some  rhir.k  it  would  be  very  defu-ablejf  they  could  kc^p  all 
hvpocrirPs  our,  and  admit  all  true  chriilians ;  tliat  fo  church 
iri'jmhers  mit^ht  have  little  to  do  with  one  another  but  to  enjoy 
thendclves,  and  keen  one  another  warm  and  comfortable,  undif- 
tujbed  by  perils  among  falfe  brethren.  I  doubt  not  but  that 
Chriil  could,  if  iie  had  thnr.ght  tir,  have  furnilhcd  his  churches 
with  fuch  rules,  and  gifts  of  difcernment,  and  have  {o  guided  and 
influenced  them  in  their  determinations  and  condud,  tliat  not 
one  hypocrite  Ih  )uld  be  able  to  creep  in.  But  fmce  he  has  not 
done  it,  we  may  be  certain  that  tlic  ends  he  had  in  view  in  tlie 
inflitution  of  viuble  churches  would  not  be  fcrved  by  rtriclcr  and 
more  diflinguilhing  rules  than  thofc  we  have.  If  we  laould  im- 
agine that  we  could,  from  our  experiences,  obfcrvations,  and  phi- 
lofophy,  fpin  and  weave  iiner  feives  than  that  coarfe  riddle  which 
the  gofpel  has  provided  ;  it  would  not  be  lawful  for  us  to  regu- 
late our  conduct  by  any  rule  but  that  of  the  gofpel.  It  is  not  th« 
will  of  Chril%  nor  for  the  intereft  of  his  kingdom,  that  churches 
be  more  pure  than  a  due  obfervance  ot  his  ordinances  will  keep 
tii«rm.  'rhe  houfe  of  God  needs  vell'cls  of  wood  and  earth,  as 
v^cll  as  of  gold  SiWsS  filvcr.  Who  knows  but  that  the  dcor  of  ihe 
claich  is  made  io  wide,  that  many  unconverted  perfons  entering 
n.iiihr  have  accefs  to  gofpel  ordinances,  and  by  them  be  favingly 
turned  to  (jod  r  Who  knows  but  that  it  is  the  def.gn  of  Lhrilf, 
tlKii  there,  diouid  be  fuch  in  tliC  church  as  (hail  fuinifh  ficijuent 
cccafions  foruf.ng  the  ordinances  of  dircipline,t hat  fo  they  may  not 
fmk  into  dcfuctudc  ?  Th-i  chuiches  be  kept  watchful,  and  (liew 
their  zeal  in  reproving  fcandaluus  offences,  and  their  charity  in 
reltoring  with  the  fpirit  of  meeknefs  fuch  as  are  overtaken  with  a 
ffiuit.     Or  if  liny  Ih.guki  tv^^iain  incorrigible,  that  oihers  may  be 

awakened 


Tlje  Right  of  Alnujfion  into  the  Church.  S'f 

tawalcened  and  warned  by  fuch  examples  to  take  hecvl  lert  they 
fall  ?  If  we  wi(h  to  fcrew  up  thegofpel  rule  a  whit  (Iraiter  than  it 
ftands,  if  we  refufe  one  unconverted  perfon  who  is  regularly  ad- 
admiflible,  we  counterwork.  Chrift's  ends  ;  and  have  reafon  to 
expect  that  we  {xxaW  be  frowned  upon,  as  thofe  fecm  to  have 
been  remarkably  who  have  pretended  to  form  pure  churclies. 

It  may  alfo  be  thought  that  brotherly  love  could  not  ration- 
ally be  required  of,  and  ex^-rcifed  by  Chriilians  towards  any  but 
/uch  as  give  at  Icall  preponderant  evidence  that  they  are  inv.ard- 
iy  fandified.  But  1  alT^,  How  can  we  poliibly  divine  v.'hether  any 
one  has  fuch  figns  of  grace  as  feldom  fail,  when  we  know  not  what 
they  are,  or  whether  any  fuch  figns  are  vifible  to  us  ?  But  the  rule 
of  charity  is  plain  and  certain.  Whoever  exhibits  external  holinefs 
(what  that  confifts  in  will  be.  afterwards  confidercd)  is  to  be  re- 
puted, received  and  loved  as  a  difciple  of  Chrift  for  hisiake.  He 
has  that  mark  of  a  difciple,  which  Chriil:  has  appointed  as  a  crite- 
rion of  thofe  whom  he  would  have  us  love,  and  treat  as  belonging 
to  him.  Many  of  thefe  are  not  difciples  indeed  :  How  many  Vv'a 
kno*A'  not.  But  in  receiving  and  loving  therA  all  we  obey  his 
command,  and  teftify  our  love  to  his  name  ;  which  he  accepts, 
a-s  if  we  had  received  him.  And  ihall  we  deem  it  impofuble  cr 
unreafonable  to  have  brotherly  love  for  one  who  has  thofe  marks 
of  a  difciple  of  ChriO",  for  which  he  requires  us  to  have  a  ferveat 
charity  towards  fuch  for  hisiake?  Who  profeffes  and  behaves 
like  a  true  chriftian  fo  far  as  we  can  difcern  ?  Shall  we  fay  that 
fuch  a  one  is  an  unfit  object  of  our  charity,  unlcfs  we  had  higher 
^evidence  of  his  inward  ftate  than  Chritl  has  thought  fit  to  give  us  ; 
and  knew  that  the  greater  part  of  fuch  are  fincere  ?  If  any  can 
prove  that  viiible  faints  are,  for  the  moft  part,  inwardly  fantlified, 
we  (liall  rejoice  at  the  inforn:iation,  it  being  better  than  the  fears 
of  many. 

Upon  the  whole,  fince  we  have  a  rule  by  which  It  may  be 
known  who  are  vifible  faints,  and  that  all  thcfe  are  the  objects  of 
our  chridian  charity  ;  and  (ince  v.'e  know  not  whether  the  great- 
er part  of  vifible  faints  are  inwardly  fo,  and  find  no  rule,  by  which 
we  can  determine  certainly  who  have,  or  who  have  not,  on  the 
whole,  a  preponderant  probability  in  their  favour  ;  we  (hall  but 
perplex  ourfclvcs  in  vain,  and  make  the  gofpel  rule  ufelefs,  if  it 
mufi:  firft  be  determined  moil  probable  that  a  perfon  is  a  faint  in 
heart,  before  it  can  be  determined  that  he  is  a  faint  outwardly. 
We  may  know  that  the  children  of  believers  are  vifible  faints, 
and  are  proper  fubjecis  of  bciplifm,  and  are  to  be  received  as  be^ 
longing  to  Chrift.     But  \vc  fnould  have  an  infnperablc  tafk,  if  we 

muit 


52  ^ke  Right  of  Alm'iJJlon  into  the  Church. 

muft  firft  prove  it  moft  probable  that  each  one  is  inwardly  fanc- 
tihcd,  before  we  could  determine  he  was  a  vifible  Taint.  We 
niay  know  that  profeffed  chriftians  who  arc  not  fcandalous  are 
vifible  faints,  and  objects  of  our  charity  j  but  how  we  can  know 
that  the  greater  part  of  thefe  are  fincerc,  and  {o  that  the  greater  pro- 
bability is  in  favour  of  each  profcfTor  appears  not.  If  we  would 
take  the  rule  in  its  fimplicityjandacquiefee  in  the  evideiice  we  are 
to  proceed  upon,  our  way  would  be  plain  and  fafe.  i5ut  when 
■we  fancy  that  the  judgment  of  charity  ought  to  proceed  upon 
higher  evidence,  and  fet  about  refining  upon  the  terms  of  com- 
munion, and  draining  up  the  rule  foas  to  comport  with  our  pre- 
conceived notions  of  probability,  and  fatisfactory  evidence,  and 
think  a  majority  of  true  faints  in  each  church  is  nccelTary  that  the 
jntereHs  of  Chrifl's  kingdom  may  be  fafe,  no  wonder  if  we  get 
embarralTed,  and  our  way  is  fo  dark  that  we  know  not  whether 
we  go  right  or  wrong,  but  can  only  grope,  and  guefs,  and  pre- 
fume. 

i  have  infixed  the  more  on  thefe  obfervatlons  becaufe,  if  they 
are  jufi,  they  arc,  I  think,  of  importance  to  be  attended  to  in  pur- 
fuing  the  enquiry  in  vvliich  we  arc  engaged,  and  may  help  us  with 
more  facility  and  fatisfaction  to  refolve  the  points  which  ftill  re- 
main to  be  difculled. 


SECTION    III. 

^hot  a  credible  Profejjion  of  Chri/iianity  conjliiutes  a  vifillc  Saini,"^ 
TPljat  Profejfion  is  credible. 

THE  rcfult  o^  our  enquiries,  fo  far  as  we  have  proceeded  i5i 
That  vifible  faints  have  a  right  of  admifllon  into  the  church. 
That  vifible  faints  may  be  feen  or  known  to  be  fuch,  being  the 
fubje£ls  of  that  holinefs  which  may  be  fccn,  and  which  is  tiiere- 
fore  an  external  and  real  qualification.  7hat  though  it  is  not  a 
certain  evidence  of  inward  fandtification,  or  that  the  greater  part 
of  vifible  faints  are  fincere,  yet  it  is  the  fole,  credible  and  fufnci- 
cnt  evidence,  u|X)n  which,  according  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  the 
judgment  of  charity  proceeds,  in  reputing  and  regarding  any  as 
ChrilVians,  and  gives  fancHfying  grace  all  t!ie  vifibiHty  which  it 
has  in  thejuft  view  of  others. 

Hence  it  is  obvious  to  fee,  that  //  is  mt  the  reality^  hut  the  fgns 
cr  evidences  of  grace  which  give  one  a  right  of  admiflion.  Not 
the  certain  evidences  thcronf,  or  fuch  as  are  known  to  amount  to  a 
preponderant  probability  in  favour  of  the  whole  cdllcchve  body 

of 


The  Right  of  Admijfion  into  the  Church,  ^^ 

of  vifible  faints,  or  of  each  particular  perfon  ;  hxit  fuch  evidence  as 
the  rules  and  exa?riples  in  the  New  Tcjlamcnt  point  out  or  require.  We 
need  not  trouble  ourfelves  about  the  proper  fignification  of  the 
fcholaftic  terms  vijiblc^  probable^  credible.  All  v.e  have  to  do  is  to 
find  by  what  rule  and  evidence  the  ApoHles  condudied  ihemfclves 
in  admitting  members  into  the  church ;  and  may  leave  it  to  others 
to  call  it  by  what  name  they  pleafe. 

The  point  now  to  be  enquired  into  is,  what  is  vifible  or  ex- 
ternal hoiinefs,  and  wherein  does  it  coniift  ?  Or  what  are  thole 
credible  evidences  of  fandlifying  grace  which  give  a  right  of  ad- 
miiTion  ? 

It  has  been  obferved,  /to  outward  hoiinefs,  or  (if  any  chufe 
rather  to  call  it)  the  credible  evidence  of  inward  lanJlification,  is 
a  real  character  or  qualification,  and  not  a  mere  appearance  of 
fomething  whofe  reality  is  doubtful.  'J hat  it  gives  thofe  the  de- 
nomination of  faints  in  whom  it  is  found.  And  that  it  compre- 
hends all  thofe  figns  of  grace,  which  can  be  exhibited  to,  or  dif- 
cerned  by  the  church. 

But  this  is  not  fo  to  be  underftood,  as  if  one  were  not  a  vifibls 
faint,  unlefs  he  fhould  exhibit  all  the  figns  of  inv^ard  fan6liiica- 
tion,  which  the  church  is  capable  of  difcerning.  For  fome  vifi- 
ble faints  give  much  more  evidence  of  this  tiian  others.  Out- 
ward hclinefs  appears  in  very  different  degrees. 

Nothing  more  is  required  to  conftitute  an  infant  a  vifible  faint, 
and  rightful  member  of  the  church,  than  the  relative  qualifica- 
tion of  having  a  believer  for  its  parent,  and  fo  iiaving  an  intereft 
in  the  covenant,  in  which  God  has  promifed  to  be  a  God  to  his 
people  and  to  their  {^tA,  For  if  the  root  be  holy,  fo  are  the 
branches.  And  if  thofe  promifcs  of  fanclifying  grace,  which  arc 
made  indefinitely  to  the  children  of  the  covenant,  that  the  I>ord 
will  circumcife  their  hearts  ;  that  if  we  believe  on  Chrifi:  we  rtiall 
be  faved  and  our  houfe,  of  which  their  baptifm  is  an  outward 
token  ;  thefe  promifes,  together  with  the  fpecial  external  privi- 
leges granted  to  thofe  who  arc  under  the  outward  adminifiration 
of  the  covenant,  are  a  foundation  for  a  charitable  ho|;e,  that  in- 
fant members  are  the  fubjcifls  of  fand^ifying  grace  ;  or  however, 
that  in  God's  ov/n  time  he  will  vifit  thein  in  mercy,  and  pour 
out  his  fpirit  upon  them.  They  are  the  fubjccls  ef  relative  fed- 
eral hoiinefs,  being  feparated  and  dedicated  to  God  by  his  cove- 
nant. And  charity  is  to  prefume  and  hope  the  beft,  upon  the 
grounds  held  forth  in  the  promife  which  is  to  us,  and  to  our 
children.  Su4:h  an  infant  is  as  really  a  vifible  faint,  and  as  right- 
fully a  member  of  the  viiiblc  cl'.urch,  as  the  mcfi  exemplary  adult 
chrilVian  ;  though  much  greater  degrees  of  vifible  faintn)ip  may 
gopcar  in  the  latter,  and  charity  may  have  gicuiids  of  more  con- 
fidence 


51  ^Je  Right  of  AchntJJlon  into  the  Omrch.  '    * 

fi  !cn:c  concerning  one,  whofc  profcfTion  and  life  expreflcs  purify 
of  heart,  than  one  in  whom  federal  holincfs  only  can  be  difcern- 
ed.  But  it,is  the  reality  of  vifible  faintflVip,  in  how  low  a  degree 
focver,  which  gives  a  right  of  admiilion  ;  though  higher  degrees 
carry  Wronger  evidence  of  inward  ran;!?iiiicaiion.  However,  the 
higher  degrees  arc  no  infallible  evidence  ^  and  the  loweft  arc  a 
fuilicicnt  ground  for  charity. 

But  a  credible  profeffion  of  tlic  chrlftian  religion  is  ordinarily 
ncceffary  to  give  the  denomination  of  a  viiible  faint,  and  a  right 
of  adir.ilTion,  to  an  adult  pcrfon  wh.o  is  not  an  actual  member  : 
Yea,  it  is  by  abiding  in,  and  holding  fail  their  profeffion,  that 
chriillans  maintain  the  charailcr  of  vifible  faints,  and  a  right  to 
continue  members,  and  ufe  the  privileges  of  fuch.  This,  1  con- 
ceive, is  the  qualiiication  which  brings  one  under  the  bond  of  the 
covenant,  and  entitles  to  admiiTion  to  the  privileges  of  its  external 
adminifiration.  To  this,  external  federal  holincfs  is  annexed.  This 
is  the  evidence  upon  which  charity  reputes  profefTors  to  be  true 
dlfciples  of  Chrift.  Nor  do  I  find  any  tiling  necelTary  -o  give  one  a 
right  to  be  admitted  a?  a  member  of  an  inlliruted  church,  beiides  a 
credible  profeflion  of  affent  and  confent  to  the  gofpel.  A  con- 
verfation  anfwerable  to  our  profeflion  is  indeed  neeelTary  to  main- 
tain the  credit  of  it,  after  we  have  taken  it  upon  us.  Repentance 
of  former  mi'carriages,  and  refolutions  of  future  obedience,  arc 
alfo  to  be  profefTed  as  ciTeniial  branches  of  chriflianity.  But  it 
appears  not  that  the  adtniflion  of  any  profeflior  was  held  in  fuf- 
pepfe  by  the  Apofllcs  for  one  hour,  that  he  might  prove  the  fm- 
cerity  of  his  faith  by  a  courfe  of  obedience.  So  that  though  ex- 
ternal holincfs,  if  defcribed  in  thofe  more  eminent  and  advanced 
degrees  in  which  it  fometimes  appears  in  chriilians,  would  include 
all  thofe  cxprefTions  of  faith,  and  of  the  graces  /ind  virtues  of  the 
c!;nflinn  temper  in  the  life,  by  which  they  (hine  as  lights  in  the 
world  ;  yet  if  we  confidcr  it  in  tl;e  decree  in  which  it  is  ncccilary 
to  confiitute  an  adult  vifible  faint,  and  qualify  for  admilfion  into 
the  church,  it  confifls,  I  think,  as  was  faid,  merely  in  a  profcifion 
of  chriflianity. 

If  this  be  admitted,  which  perhaps  will  fcarcc  be  denied  by 
anv,  the  great  point  to  be  attended  to  is,  what  is  a  credible  pro- 
fcliion  of  chriflianity  r  Or  what  protcfllon  appears  to  be  ncccfl-jry 
niid  fwfHcient,  according  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  to  denomimte 

ic  a  vifible  faint,  to  give  him  a  right  of  admiflion,  and  the 
vliurch*  .1  warrant  to  receive  him  as  a  member,  and  a  proper  ob- 
ject of  chriflian  charity.  And  our  care  thould  be  to  avoid  ex- 
tremes on  each  hand  j  and  flatc  the  rule  fo  as  that  it  bo  not  to* 
ilrait,  nor  too  loofc. 

It 


the   Right  of  Adimffion  into  the  Church,  55 

It  will,  I  think,  be  granted  by  all,  tliat  it  is  not  fufiicicnt  for 
a  man  to  lay,  in  a  general  indetinite  way,  that  he  piofeilcs  to  be 
a  chriftian,  and  to  believe  tliat  the  Icriptures  arc  given  by  God, 
to  inrtru6l  mankind  in  the  concerns  of  religion.  There  have 
been  fome  who  have  called  themfelvcs  chriftians,  who  yet  were 
vifibly  of  a  religion  as  different  froin  that  which  is  plainly  tauglit 
by  Chriil  and  his  Apoftles,  as  can  well  be  imagined.  It  is  need- 
lefs  to  confirm  this  by  inlhnces.  And  though  we  need  not  judge 
the  fpiritual  flate  of  thofe  who  appear  to  be  grofsly  and  fcanoHl- 
oully  corrupt  in  their  principics,  yet  we  may  judge  them  uniit 
for  church  communion. 

Again.  A  particular  and  exprcfs  profcfTion  of  aiTent  and  con- 
fent  to  every  article  of  the  chriJllan  religion,  as  contained  in  the 
New  Teftament,  is  not  neceffary.  Chriftians  in  general  have 
notfufficient  knowledge  to  underfbnd  the  whole  fyftem  of  chrif- 
tianlty.  There  are  many  points  in  which  they  have  not  yet 
been  inflructed,  or  concerning  which  they  may  be  in  doubt. 
From  the  accounts  we  have  of  the  profelfions,  upon  which  the 
Apollles  received  perfons  into  the  church,  it  would  feem  that  3 
very  brief  and  general  confefHon  of  faith  might  be  fufiicient.  k 
fhould  however  be  underflood  to  imply  the  capital,  or  mofl  fun- 
damental articles  of  chriftianity,  faith  in  Chrift,  repentance  to- 
wards God,  with  refolutions  and  engagements  of  obedience  to 
his  commandments  and  ordinances.  But,  however,  1  think  it 
appears  not  from  the  New  Teflament  that  an  explicit  and  formal 
profeiTion  of  all  the  fundamental  articles  of  the  chriflian  religion 
is  neceffary.  We  may  charitably  prefume,  as  the  Apoftles  fcerni 
to  have  done,  that  men  do  in  a  good  meafure  underiiand  and  be- 
lieve fuch  points  as  are  not  called  in  queftion,  but  are  commonly 
owned  by  fober  men  ;  and  that  they  will  readily  receive  inltruc- 
tion  in  other  articles,  when  it  fhall  be  propofed  to  them  from 
the  word  of  God.  Now  it  is  doubtlefs  fafe  to  conform  to  the  rules 
and  example  of  the  Apofiles. 

But  a  profefFion  of  chriflianity  is  not  credible,  if  fuch  errors  are 
profefled  along  with  it,  as  utterly  and  evidently  overthrow  the 
truth  of  the  gofpel,  and  render  the  laws  of  Chrift  of  none  t^i^L^  \ 
which  fruftrate  the  grace  of  God,  or  make  void  his  laws. 

And  there  muft  alfo  be  evidence  that  a  profelTor  has  a  compe- 
tent underflanding  of  the  import  of  what  he  profefTes,  and  that 
he  fpeaks  in  ferious  earr.efl^,  in  integrity  and  veracity,  without 
deceit  or  defigncd  equivocation.  But  1  think  it  is  not  ncceflarv, 
and  ought  not  to  be  required  as  a  term  of  church  communion, 
that  any  profefs,  aflent  to  any  creed,  or  confent  to  any  church 
covenants  of  human  compofition,  in  the  terms  in  which  they 
may  be  drawn  up.     Not  but  that  a  church  has  a  right  to  be  ti- 

tbrir.ed 


56  ^^^  Ri^ht  of  Adm'iJJiort  v:to  the  Church, 

formed  of  the  rdi^ious  fentiments  and  refolutions  of  thofe  who 
(Icfire  to  becjiuc  niembers.  And  our  joining  \%ith  an  inllituted 
churcli  purports  a  confederation,  or  mutual  covenanting  to  walk 
together  in  the  order  and  ordinances  of  the  gofpcl.  Nor  is  it  any 
ways  improper  that  churches,  as  well  as  particular  chriflians, 
Ihould,  as  tliere  is  occafion,  exhibit  a  confcinon  of  their  faith, 
and  an  account  of  their  order,  in  fuch  terms  as  they  judge  beft, 
toexprcfs  their  underllanding  of  the  gofpel ;  but  not  as  making  it 
a  term  of  communion  that  others  profcls  their  faith  in  the  fame 
words.  On  the  contrary,  every  one  Hiould  be  at  liberty  to  ex- 
prefs  his  thriPiian  fentiments  as  he  thinks  m.cft  proper  ;  nothing 
more  being  required  than  that  he  fpcak  confornrably  to  the  ora- 
cles of  God.  We  have  neither  rule  nor  example  in  the  New 
'i'cfiament,  for  churches  making  any  formularies,  or  canons,  cx- 
preiTcd  in  terms  different  from  the  words  of  infpiration,  a  term 
of  chril^ian  communion.  And  our  churches  h.ave  always  dif- 
claimcd  ar.y  fuch  pretence. 

Again.  '  A  relation  of  the  time  and  manner  in  which  we  have 
been  turned  from  dnrkncfs  to  li^ht,  and  from  the  power  of  fat::n 
to  God,  is  not  requifite  to  our  being  vifible  faints,  credible  pro- 
feffors,  and  having  a  rigiit  of  admilhon  into  the  church.     For  to 
life  the  words  of  ancthcr,  *'  Tlicre  is  no  foot:"iep  of  any  fuch  way 
of  ihz  Apoi\les,  or  primitive  miniflers  and  chrillians  requiring  any 
fuch  relation,  in  order  to  their  receiving,    and    treating  others  as 
chriftian  brethren  to  all  inlents  and  purpofes  ;  or  of  their  iirft  ex- 
amining them   concerning   tlie   particular   method  and  order  of 
their  experiences.     They   required  of  them  a  profefTion  of  the 
things  wrought,  but  no  account  of  the  manner  of  working  was 
required  of  them.     Nor  is  tliere  the  Icaft  fliauow  in  the  fcripturc 
of  any  fuch  cuftom  in   the  ciiurch  of  God,  from  Adam   to  the 
death  of  the  Apoftle  John."     Thus  Mr.  Edwards.     And  1  think 
we  might  fay  further,  that  of  all  thofe  good  men,  whofe  names 
arc  recorded  in  th.e  f^riptures,  we  flrall  fcarce  lind  three  infiances, 
of  the   manner  of  whofe  firfl  converfion  we  liave  any  account. 
Atid  indccvl  I  know  not  how  it  can  be  known  that  they  ever  were 
confcious  of  bein^;  enemies  to  God  ;  but  migh.t,  for  any  thing  we 
know,  b>;  under  the  infiueiice  of  fanc^ifying  grace  from  their  ear- 
liefl   remembrance.     And    how  many  chriltians  may  have  been 
fanftiftcd  in  like  manner  from  their  infancy  none  can  fay.     And 
even  in  thofe  whofe  converfion  to  God  tirft  commences  in  adult 
age»  how  often  is  the  divine  life  ingencratcd  in  the  manner  ex- 
prcHl'd  l>y  our  Saviour  ?  "  So  is  the  kingdom  of  Ciod,  as  If  a  man 
(hould  call  feed  into  the  ground,  and  Ihould  iloep  and  rife  night 
and  day,  and  the  feed  (hould  fpring  and  grow  up  he  knoweth  not 

how." 


Thv  Right  of  Alm'iiftcn  kio  the  Church*  5^ 

how."  And  as  many  who  could  piinv5^ually  tell  the  time  and  maii^ 
ner  of  their  conveiTion  have  given  great  reafon  to  think  they  never 
were  foundly  converted  at  all,  fo  there  are  many  for  whom  we  are 
bound  to  have  chanty,  who  will  fay  v;iih  that  eminent  chriftian, 
Mr.  Baxter,  "  1  Icnovv  neither  the  day  nor  the  year  when  I  began 
to  be  fmcere." 

Thus  far,  I  think,  chrlftians  are  generally  agreed.  But  it  may 
be  afked  further,  whether  any  ought  to  be  coalidered  as  credible 
profeilbrs,  or  admitted  as  members  of  an  inftituied  church,  but 
thofe  who profefs  fav'ing  faith  and  repentance^  and  that  they  confcni 
to  the  covenant  in  godly  fincerity^  and  are  fauds  in  heart  ? 

This  point  needs  to  be  carefully  enquired  into.  ChriftianS 
feem  to  have  different  fentiments  Upon  it.  Perhaps  they  have 
mifunderftood  each  other,  and  are  not  really  fo  wide  in  their 
meaning,  as  fome  of  their  expreiTions  would  leem  to  import. 

It  may  be  obferved,  that  profelTion  of  faving  faith,  is  an  am- 
biguous phrafe.  It  may  be  taken  in  two  fenfes.  if  by  it  we 
underhand  a  man's  declaring  his  perfuafion  that  his  faith- and  re- 
pentance are  faving,  this  I  think  is  not  necefiary  to  give  credibil- 
ity to  the  chriftlan  profcITion,  to  render  one  a  vifible  faint,  a 
proper  objecl  of  charity. 

But  if,  by  a  profeflion  of  faving  faith,  we  mean  fuch  a  pro- 
fefiion  as  appears  truly  to  cxprefs  the  religion  taught  in  the  gof^ 
pel,  which  has  the  promife  of  falvation  ;  in  this  fenfe  it  may  be 
admitted  that  there  (hould  be  a  profelfion  of  faving  faith.  So 
that  if  a  man's  faith  or  religion  be  fuch  as  his  profeuicn  properly 
holds  forth,  he  muft  be  judged  to  be  a  true  chril^ian  who  wiil 
be  faved,  how  much  foever  he  may  doubt,  or  fufpe-ri:  that  his 
faith,  repentance,  and  religious  experiences  may  be  but  the  ef- 
fect of  common  illumination  and  grace. 

Firjh  It  is  not  necefiary  for  a  man  to  profefs  that  his  faith 
is  faving,  that  his  repentance  and  confent  to  the  covenant  is  in 
godly  fmcerity,  that  he  has  a  confident,  or  comfortr.ble,  or  pre- 
ponderating perfuafion  of  his  fjving  intereil  in  Chrifi.     ' 

Some  have  thouglu,  a  profeffion  of  cliriaianity  mufl  imply  a 
profelLon  that  wc  arc  perlbns  of  fincere  chrii^ian  piety,  !rue  faints 
in  heart  :  And  that  none  are  to  be  accounted  vifible  faints  or 
difciples,  vifible  members  of  the  chrifiian  church,  unlefs  they  at 
lealf  pretend  to  be  gracious  pea  fons.  But  this,  1  tliink,  is  a  man- 
ifcft  miftake. 

For  1  tind  no  ruL-  in  tiie  New  Teflament,  requiring  profefibrs 
to  declare  their  certain  or  fatisfactory  perfuafion  that  their  faith 
and  repentance  are  favin?,  or  tliat  they  are  inwardly  fanaifcd, 
as  the  necelfary  qualirication  (o^  their  being  admitted  as  members 
of  an  inftituted  church.     I  lini  noirjlance  or  (xarnph^  proving  or 


H  intimating 


5?  *rhe  Rkht  of  Adm'ijjton  into  the  Gnirch, 

jnrimailng  that  a  proFcfiion  of  fuch  a  pjerfiiafcn  concerning  them* 
fcJvcs  vva^  rct^uircii  of  any  vshom  ihc  ApollJcs  a*lmiticd,  or  was 
exhibited  by  2ny  upon  ilieir  jainini^  to  the  church.  Nothing 
more  tiian  a  liinpis  proiciiiDn  of  repentance,  and  believing  in 
Chrlrt^  anij  it>  ihc  word  of  faiili,  appeals  to  have  been  ever  re- 
quired, or  oilcrcd  on  any  inch  occahon. 

it  has  been  argued,  that  proidFing  Chriil  according  to  the 
Tcripiure  notiou,  is  nroFefling  a  laving  intereli  in  him  \  and  that 
all  vii:b;e  members  of  the  chriliian  churcli  arc  thcfo  v\!io  profeft 
to  be  gvacKJus  perfons,  as  looicing  on  thcnvfelvcs,  and  feeming, 
cr  at  Ic:;l^  pretending  to  be  iuch  \  becauie  ;avv/;v,  who  have  had  a 
confident  pcrfuafion  of  their  intcrelt  in  hi r.\, and rai fed  expeciaikns 
of  being  acknowledged  by  him,  will  fee  rejected  by  him.  But  this 
proves  not  that  ail  rncmbers  of  the  church  are  fo  confident  of  their 
being  the  fubjecis  of  fan^i Tying  grace,  and  ilanding  in  a  faving  re- 
lation to  C brill  i  which  is  doubilefs  tar  from  being  true.  Many 
Xvc^i  faints,  as  well  as  other  profefibrs,  liave  not  this  confidence  in 
their  own  title  to  a  lot  in  tlie  kingdom  of  glory.  Much  lefs  does 
this  prove,  that  tl  profejjiofi  of  having  fuch  a  conndent  perfuafiou 
gf  cur  Q'^i[\  godliucfs,  and  faving  intercft  in  Chrift,  is  ncceffary 
to  our  beii^g  viilbie  faints,  and  admiilible  into  the  vifiblc  church, 
-And  indeed  who  fees  not  how  inconclufive  and  illogical  it  is  to 
clraw  a  univerfal  conciution  from  a  particular  propofition  ?  To 
argue  that  all  vilible  faints  muil  profefs  a  pcifuafion  of  a  faving 
inrcreft  in  ChriO,  becaufc  rjianyv^ho  have  fuch  a  perfuafion  will 
be  difow ned  by  him.     AJatth,  vii.   21 — 23. 

Again,  if  a  perfuafion  that  our  faith  is  faving,  that  ^^'e  are 
true  faints,  and  interefted  in  Chrid,  is  not  the  faith  or  religion  of 
a  cluiftian,  by  which  he  hopes  to  be  faved  ;  then  a  man's  profef- 
llng  thai  liis  taith  ii.  faving,  that  he  is  a  true  faint,  interclW  in 
Chr.it,  is  no  piofc-inon  ot  the  chriliian  faith  or  religion.  Every 
article  of  the  chriliian  religion  is  contained  in  the  gofpcl  ;  and  is 
to  be  believed  upon  the  lelimiony  of  God  :  And  nun's  profeffi- 
ons  are  to  be  con>pared  with  this  rule,  and  examined  by  it,  that 
we  may  judge  whether  what  they  profefs  gives  us  fufficient 
grounds  of  churitv-  l^ut  when  men  profefs  that  tUey  have  fav- 
ing faith,  repent  in  goul\  finccrify,  are  true  faints  ;  that  they  have 
a  conhdcnt,  or  prevailing  perfualion  of  this,  they  profefs  fomc- 
thing  which  i^  Hot  afiert'cd  in  the  fcripti-res.  if  our  religion  be 
conformable  to  tliat  which  the  gospel  teachers,  it  will  favc  us, 
v^!)aievcr  our  perfuafion  may  be  concerning  our  own  fpiritu?l 
ftatc  and  charac^U^.  And  if  what  we  protels  is  found  to  agree 
wir!>  iliis  iule»  we  mnO,  acc(Mdi!>g  to  the  rule  of  charity,  which 
j^rUumes  uut  n\ii\  profcfi   jg'c^^^'y  ^^  ^^^^''"  belief,  be  reputed 

and 


Tfoe  Right  of  AlmJJJton  into  the  Church,  59 

and  received  for  true  chridians.  But  our  perfuafion,  that  we  are 
faints  in  heart,  and  have  faving  faith,  and  interefl  iu  Chrift,  how- 
ever confident  we  may  be  in  profefring;  it,  is  not  admilP.ble,  ac- 
cording to  the  rule  by  which  the  judgfDent  of  charity  proceeds, 
asanv  evidence  in  our  favour.  Our  creuiJ3]e  declaration  of  what 
we  think  of  Chrill  and  the  gofpel,  and  not  what  we  think  of  our 
own  chara6ter  and  ftate,  is  the  evidence  by  which  it  muft  be  .!e- 
terniined,  whetiier  we  are  vifible  faints,  and  objefls  of  chriftian 
charity. 

This  will  further  appear,  if  we  ccndder  for  what  end  men  are 
required  to  profefs  their  religion,  it  is  not  to  inform  the  church 
what  one  thinks  of  hiinfcHv  wiiat  opinion  lie  has  of  his  own  god- 
linefs,  or  fpirltual  llate  :  Of  this  the  church  is  10  judge,  upon 
coiT^paring  what  he  profedes  with  the  gofpel :  But  it  is  to  inforin 
then  VN^hat  his  notions  oi  chriftianity  are,  whether  he  appears 
rightly  to  undcriland  it,  to  approve  of  it,  a!id  receive  it  as  the 
rule  of  his  faith,  the  foundation  of  his  hope,  end  the  law  of  his 
life.  It  is  not  to  tell  them  how  well  fatisiied  the.profeflbr  is  that 
his  faith  is  found,  his  repentance  and  refoluiions  gracioufly  fincere, 
and  his  confent  to  the  covenant  cordial ;  but  to  exhibit  matter  of 
fatisfadlion  to  them,  that  what  he  profeiTes  affent  and  confent  to 
is  the  true  gofpel,  as  taught  in  the  New  Teflament.  And  it  is 
quite  impertinent  to  this  purpofe,  for  profeflbrs  to  tell  the  ch.urch 
of  their  confident  or  comfor'.able  perfuafion  concerning  them- 
felves  j  as  if  that  ought  to  be  of  any  weight,  or  us  if  they  had  a 
right  to  diflate  to  the  church,  what  tlieir  judgment  fnould  be. 

It  may  be  allied.  Does  a  profeflion  make  any  thing  viable  be- 
yond what  is  profeiTed  ?  What  good  reafon  then  can  we  have  to 
judge  any  one  to  be  a  true  faint,  if  he  does  not  profefs  or  pretend 
that  he  is  one  of  this  characcer. 

I  anfwer — If  a  man  fnould  profefs  and  pretend  to  be  a  true 
faint,  all  this  muff  go  for  nothrng  in  the  account  of  the  church. 
His  tcfiimony  to  this  is  not  to  be  admitted  ;  but  what  he  profef- 
fes  as  his  faith  mud  be  tried  by  the  fcriptures,  whether  it  be  found 
or  not.  While  he  fpeaks  as  a  zvitnefs^  declaring  what  his  religi- 
ous fentiments,  views  and  purpofes  are,  the  church  is  to  allow 
him  ample  and  generous  credit,  if  there  be  no  fufncient  reafon  to 
fufpCvSi  his  veracity.  For  every  man  muH:  be  allowed  to  know 
be/f  iiis  ov;n  thoughts,  views  and  purpofes.  But  if  he  takes  up- 
on him  the  part  ot  zijud^e^  or  to  give  his  opinion  that  his  faith  is 
found,  and  Vvill  fave  him,  that  he  is  a  true  chridian,  a  fubjecl  of 
fanctifying  grace,  this  ought  to  have  no  weight.  He  has  a  right 
to  judge  for  himfelf  what  his  fpiritual  ftate  is;  and  if  he  finds 
jeafon  to  judge,  or  hope  thut  his  ffatc  is  good,  he  may  rejoice  in 


6o  7he  Right  of  Adm'iJJion  into  the  Church, 

it.  JJiit  his  declaring  this  is  no  evidence  to  ot'ncrs  that  he  Is  a 
proper  zih]tti  ot  charity.  In  a  word,  if  what  he  profeiTes  as  his 
religion  be  found  agreeable  to  the  gofpel,  he  is  a  vifible  faint  ; 
and  the  rule  of  charity  obliges  us  to  repute  him  a  true  faint.  But 
a  man's  profcfTmg  a  perfuafion  that  he  is  a  true  faint,  is  no 
]>.ut  ol  the  evidence  on  which  the  judgment  of  charity  is  ground- 
ed. For  we  are  no  where  dire^ied  in  fcripturc  to  judge  any  one 
to  1^0  a  fairit,  becawfc  he  profcfTes  his  ftrcng  pet  fualion  of  it. 

When  Feter  confcfled  that  Jcfus  was  the  Chrifl,  he  gave  evi- 
dence that  he  was  born  of  God,  and  influenced  by  the  Holy 
Gholl:;  though  his  profeffion  contained  no  pretence  of  being  re- 
generated :  aiid  whether  he  had  fuch  a  perfuafion  of  himfelf,  till 
he  hcr.rd  therej^ly  whicii  Jcfus  made,  we  know  not.  And  wlio- 
foever  bclieveth  that  Jefus  is  the  Chri(T,  viewing  his  charatfler  in 
the  light  in  which  it  is  difplayed  in  the  gofpel,  is  born  of  God. 
If  then  a  man's  profellion  gives  e/idence  tl\at  he  thus  believes,  it 
f,;vcs  evidence  that  he  is  regenerated,  though  he  fliould  not  pro- 
K'fs  or  pretend  to  this  charafler.  A  profe/Iion  not  only  makes 
ihat  viiible,  or  cred.blc,  which  is  profeffed,  but  it  often  raanifefts 
other  things  wldch  are  known  to  be  connected  with  it,  and  of 
which  the  profelTor  miglu  not  be  aware. 

Indeed  no  good  reafon  can  be  given  why  a  man's  profefllng  a 
perfuafion  that  he  is  a  true  believer,  th.at  his  piety  is  fincere, 
Jhould  be  thought  any  great  evidence  in  his  favour.  Will  any 
i'ay  that  none  ought  to  be  accounted  wife  and  good,  unlefs  they 
would  profefs  and  pretend  to  be  fuch  ? 

Are  any  more  forward  and  confident  in  pretending  to  godlinefs 
than  mai^y  who  give  leall  evidence  of  it  ?  Do  any  appear  more 
confidently  to  entertain  a  good  opinion  of  themfelves,  or  more 
fjce  to  exprcfs  it,  than  Tome  of  the  weakert  aiuJ  vaineft  of  men  ? 
Have  we  more  reafon  to  confide  in  the  judgment  or  fincerity  of 
thufe  who  pretend  to  be  perfons  of  piety,  and  the  fpecial  favour- 
ites of  heaven,  than  of  tliofe  v.lio  pretend  to  be  perfons  of  im- 
portance and  worth  in  otht»r  rcfpeds  ?  In  relatir.g  matters  of  fa£l 
and  experience,  of  which  a  man  i*?  confeious,  and  his  tcHimony 
is  called  for,  we  allow  him  to  fpcak  freely  concerning  himfelf.  In 
declaring  his  fentiments,  his  views  and  purpofcs,  we  admit  a 
;credible  perfjii  as  a  competent  and  unexceptionable  wiinefs.  But 
if  he  pretends  to  give  his  judgment  of  his  own  charadlcr,  as  being 
wife,  virtuous  or  pious,  wc  may  w^ll  fufpect  he  is  in  too  much 
Hanger  of  being  biafild.  He  isgrotly  inter!.rted  in  the  cafe,  and 
hlile  fuefs  is  tu  be  laid  on  his  prerences  furrhtr  than  they  are  fup- 
ported  by  fiitiieient  evidence.  And  i\o  wc  not  fee  tliat  many, 
xvlio  appear  diindcnt  and  fufpicious  of  th-'mlelves,  give  as  good 
evidence  to  others  that  liiey  are  found  and  fincere  believers,  as 
thofe  who  profefs  their  own  godlinefs  tnoft  roundly  and  confi-. 

fideoilyf 


Tlje  Right  of  Aimijjlon  into  the  Church.  ^I 

dcntly  ?  Mufl:  thefe  be  excluded  from  tlie  number  of  vifible  faints, 
becaufe  they  fcruple  to  profefs  that  their  faith  is  favnig  ? 

There  are,  it  is  probable,  many  fincere  chrillians  who  can  with 
all  freedom  declare  what  they  think  of  Chrift  and  thegofpe),  and 
how  they  wilh  and  intend  that  their  converfation  may  be  order- 
ed, who  yet  cannot  wirh  a  good  confcience  profefs  that  they  are? 
favingly  converted,  it  being  a  matter  of  too  much  doubt  with 
them.  '  All  thefe  muft  be  Ihut  out  of  the  church,  if  none  may 
be  admitted  but  thofe  who  can  profefs  gracious  fincerity, 
and  a  faving  intereft  in  Chrift.  And  though  I  grant  thac 
true  chrlfcians,  if  fcandalous,  may  juftly  be  del^rred  from  com- 
munion, yet  will  any  fay  that  a  chriftian's  fcrupling  to  fay  that 
he  is  a  godly  perfon,  renders  him  fcandalous  ? 

But  It  may  be  aiked,  Are  not  exercifes  of  grace  matter  of  fenfi- 
ble  experience  ?  Are  not  the  acfts  of  our  will  fubje^t  ro  our  own 
confcioufnefs,  as  well  as  the  adis  of  our  judgment  ?  Why  then 
ihould  not  one,  who  has  any  grace  in  exercife,  be  confcious  of 
it,  and  be  able  to  profefs  it  ?  i  anfwer — It  is  true  we  are  alike 
confcious  of  the  fenfible  actings  of  our  minds,  our  aftefiions  and 
v/ills.  No  one  does  or  can  doubt  that  he  has  really  fuch  appre- 
henfions,  affections,  refolutions  and  endeavours  as  he  finds  and 
feels  in  himfelf.  The  doubt,  and  danger  of  miftake  arifes  when 
we  proceed  to  reflect  upon,  and  examine  thefe  adtinjis  of  our 
minds  and  hearts,  compare  them  with  the  rule  by  which  tliey 
are  to  be  tried,  and  then  judge  of  what  kind  they  are.  In  doing 
this  men  are  exceedingly  liable  to  deceive  themfelves;  to  take 
thofe  things  for  figns  of  grace,  or  evidences  of  a  gracelefs  f!ate, 
which  are  not  (o.  We  are  in  as  much  danger  of  misjudging  as 
we  are  of  mifunderftanding  the  gofpel  rule,  or  of  applying  it  un- 
fairly. If  v\'e  entertain  falfe  notions  of  converfion,  and  evangel- 
ical holinefs,  thefe  will  pervert  our  judgment  of  our  own  charac- 
ter and  ftate.  Indeed  chriftians  fee  {o  much  reafon  to  fufpcft 
their  own  judgment  of  their  fpiritual  (late,  that  it  is  enfier  to  givtj 
a  rational  account  why  many  fliould  be  fubjc^i:  to  doubts,  than 
how  any  can  get  wholly  free  from  them.  If  good  men  may  fuf- 
pe<Si:  whether  they  are  faints  in  heart,  (which  none  deny)  \\ovj , 
can  they  profefs  that  they  are  fuch  without  prevarication,  and 
prefumi^tuoufiy  giving  teftimony  to  what  they  fufpcct  may  not 
be  true  ? 

An  eminent  divine,  who  has  warmly  maintained  the  nccefTity 
of  a  profeffion  «5f  godlinefs  as  a  term  of  admifilon  to  the  commu- 
nion of  the  vifibla  church,  has  yet  declared,  "  That  n  man's 
judging  liimfelf  unconverted,  and  fa)ing  he  did  not  think  himfelf 
converted,  v;ou1d  not  hinder  him  from  receiving  him  whocj<hib- 
itcd  proper  evidence  fo  the  church,  of  his  being  a  convert.  "Jhat 
a  -profeilion  of  godlinefs  is  a  profcilion  of  the  great  tilings  in 
v/hich  gcdlinefo  eoniiftsj  and  net  a  prof^^ihon  of  ones  own  opin'- 


62*,  TJje  Right  of  Almijjlsis  into  the  Qmrch, 

ion  of  h)s  good  ellate."  This  I  think  comes  fully  up  to  what  I 
have  been  pleading  for  :  That  It  is  not  nccefiary,  in  order  to  a 
man's  being  a  vifiblc  faint,  that  he  profcfi  any  degree  of  conti- 
dence  that  his  faith  is  faving,  that  he  is  gracloufly  llncere,  and 
that  he  has  a  faving  interell  in  Chrili.  But  how  then  are  we  to 
iiuucrriand  fuch  afilrtions  as  ihefe  ?  "All  vifible  faints  or  chrifti- 
an?,  all  Chrill's  profefling  difciplcs  or  hearers,  that  profefs  him  to 
be  il»cir  Lord,  according  the  fcriprure  nclion  of  profcfling  Chrill, 
nrc  fuch  as  profcfs  (and  claim)  a  faving  intercft  in  him,  and  re- 
lation to  him  :  —  Look  upon  themfclvcs  now  intercfted  in  Chrili, 
snd  the  eternal  blefiings  of  his  kingdom.  yfi/ vifible  members 
of  the  chriilian  church,  or  kingdom  of  iicaven,  are  thofe  that  pro^ 
fefs  to  be  gracious  pcrfons,  as  looI:ing  on  themfclves,  and  fcem- 
ing,  or  at  leall  pretending  to  be  fuch,  &c."  Can  one  who  fays 
he  does  not  think  hiinfclf  converted,  at  the  fame  time  profcfs  to 
be  a  gracious  pcrfon,  to  have  now  a  faving  intereft  in  Chrilt,  as 
looking  on  himfcif,  and  feeming,  or  at  leall:  pretending  to  be 
fuch  ? 

This  embarrafilnent,  and  feeming  inconfidency,  I  fufpe£^, 
might  be  occafioncd  by  not  diftinclly  confidcring,  that  a  man  by 
his  profcfhon  may  give  evidence  that  he  is  a  true  chrlftian,  faving- 
ly  interelted  in  Chrili,  though  he  docs  not  profefs  or  pretend,  or 
indeed  believe  that  he  is  fuch.  He  msy  exhibit  the  premifes, 
but  not  profefs  tiie  conclufion  wiiich  tlie  rule  of  charity  directs  the 
church  to  draw  from  them.  Peter's  profcri'ion  gave  evidence 
that  he  v.-as  taught  of  God  ;  yet  he  profefied  no  fuch  thing  con- 
cerning himfelf.  A  profclTion  of  faith  is  the  evidence  upon  wluca 
the  churcli  reputes  and  receives  a  prcfeffor  as  a  true  difciple  of 
Chrirt.  And  none  have  a  riglit  of  admifhon,  but  fuch  as  exhi- 
bit rational  and  fcriptuial  grounds  of  charity  ;  not  by  proferfmg 
or  pretending  that  their  faith  is  faving,  that  they  are  gracious 
pcrfons,  but  by  fpeaking  conformably  to  the  oracles  of  God  in 
tlieir  profeiriun  of  chrillianity. 

I  am  not  now  confidcring,  whetl^er  any  who  liavc  not  a  pre- 
ponderatinp;  perfuafion  that  they  are  true  fainis  can  with  a  right 
aiid  good  confciencc  make  fuch  a  profeilion  of  religion  as  may 
be  to  the  juft  faiI:>raLUon  of  a  church,  'ihis  cafe  will  be  exam- 
ined hereafter.  What  I  plead  for  is  that  it  is  not  necel:'ary  ^or  a 
profefTor  to  declare  his  judgment  or  perfuafion  concerning  his 
own  rplrltual  ftatc.  Such  a  declaration  gives  no  evidence  wheth- 
er a  man's  religion  be  conformable  to  the  s^ot'pcl,  and  f«  is  no 
part  cf  the  evidence  on  v^hlch  the  Jud;^.;tient  of  charity  is 
grounded. 

liut  Sc'tonJly.  If  by  a  profcfTion  of  codlincfs  \vc  mean  fuch  a 
profcinon  as  e.ivcs  evidence  of  chiifii-L-i   }'ie'v,  us  being  a  proper 

txprcHiQji 


'^ie  Rrght  of  Alnnjfton  ir.to  the  Omrch.  63 

^^prelTion  of  the  faith  and  holinefs  required  i'l  the  gofpd  in  order 
to  falvr.tion  ;  this  1  think  (l^ould  be  exhibited  in  order  to  admil- 
fion  into  an  inftituted  church.  There  fliould  be  a  credible  pro- 
feiilon  of  aflent  to  th,e  foundation  principles  of  tlic  cliririjan  doc- 
trine, of  confent  to  the  new  covenant  ;  and  that  without  known 
hypocrify  or  refervc.  In  a  word,  a  profcOhn  fxprrjjtve  of  the  faith  ^ 
temper^  and  rcjolutions  of  a  true  chrijlum^  as  defcribed  in  the  gofpeh 
If  this  be  what  is  meant  by  thofe  who  require  a  profcirion  of 
godfinefsj  or  faving  faith  as  a  term  of  chrifuan  communion  ;  this 
is  no  more  tha!  v/hat  iVlr.  Stoddard  has  alfo  declared  as  his  iied- 
faft  periuafion. 

Such  a  profciTor  is  a  true  chridian,  if  his  profefTion  be  a  true  and 
proper  reprefentation  of  his  mind  and  heart.  And  ccujd  we  be 
fure  of  his  veracity,  and  that  we  rightly  underflood  his  meaning, 
and  alfo  the  true  meaning  of  the  gofpei,  v/e  might  by  comparing 
thefe  together,  know  that  they  did  agree,  and  confequcntly  that 
his  faith  would  fave  him.  But  we  cannot  be  certain  of  thefe 
things.  We  know  not  whether  a  profefTor  aims  to  give  us  a  true 
account  of  himfelf  :  But  charity  requires  us  to  prefu me  that  he 
does  fo,  unlefs  we  have  evidence  of  prevarication.  Suppofewd 
have  no  reafon  to  fufpe6l  bis  veracity,  yet  what  lie  means  to  pro- 
fefs  may  be  different  from  the  fenfe  in  which  we  underiland  his 
Vw-ords.  But  we  are  to  judge  a  profeffor's  meaning  to  be  con- 
formable to  his  words  fairly  and  candidly  interpreted,  if  his  ex- 
prelTions  are  confonant  to  the  words  of  the  gofpel,  we  prefume 
that  his  meaning  is  alfo  agreeable  to  the  fcnfe,  the  truth,  and 
fpirit  of  the  gofpel,  unlefs  we  have  evidence  of  the  contrary. 
Finally,  If  a  man's  profeiTed  fentiments  Ih^uld  agree  with  our 
own,  it  may  flill  be  doubted  how  far  our  own  are  right.  For 
the  churcli  is  not  infallable.  But  they  can  judge  no  otherwife 
of  any  profefTion,  than  by  comparing  it  with  what  they  conceive 
to  be  the  U'ue  meaning  of  the  gofpel. 

So  that  the  judgment  of  charity  proceeds  upon  favourable  pr?- 
fumptions,  which  are  known  to  be  uncertain  :  So  uncertain  that, 
as  has  been  faid,  we  are  not  fure  whether  the  greater  part  of  ihcfc 
for  whom  we  ought  to  have  charity  are  fmcere.  But  if  one 
whofe  prof^jTion  appears  to  us  found  and  unc'^ceptioijable,  dif- 
covers  neither  hypocrify  nor  mifunderftanding  therein,  we  have 
all  the  evidence  in  his  favour  that  is  ordinarily  to  be  expe£^cd 
from  a  profcfTion.  And  it  would  be  uncharitable  not  to  receive 
and  regard,  and  behave  towards  him  as  a  true  chriftian. 

A  found  profi'iTion  of  clu-iliianity  may  be  termed  a  profefTion 
of  faving  faith  ;  not  becaufe  the  profeflbr  fays  that  his  fairh  is 
favinjr,  but  becaufe  what  he  profefi'es  appears  to  cxprefi  the  truth 
and  fpirit  of  the  gofpel,  which  is  cHcdtual   to  the  falvarion  of  all 

wh» 


^4  The  Ri-hi  of  Admijfum  i7:io  ils  Church. 

who  receive  ir.  But  no  profefTion  which  can  be  deJlvcred  in 
wcrds  is  a  certain  difcovciy  of  the  true  feniiincnts  and  difpoli- 
tlonsof  the  heart.  For  v^orJs  are  but  the  artilkiai  and  arbitra- 
ry ligns  of  thole  ideas  which  they  reprcfcnt  or  exprefs  ;  and  fo 
are  capable  of  being  ufed  and  underftood  in  as  many  different 
fenfes  as  men  may  pur  upon  tl^.em.  No  honcft  man  indeed  will 
dcfigncdly  equivocate  in  profeillng  las  faith  before  the  church,  or 
feck  to  deceive  them  vvith  ambiguous  expreifions.  iJut  who- 
ever fpeaks,  h.owever  fmccrcly,  ufes  words  in  his  own  icnfe  :  ^nd 
they  wlio  hear  will  under(land  his  words  in  their  own  fenfe  ; 
perhaps  divcrfe  from  what  was  meant,  and  perhaps  the  fenfe  of 
both  may  di/fer  from  the  proper  evangelical  fenfe  in  which  the 
Apoilies  fpakc.  Hence  aiifcs  manifuUi  ambiguity  in  langua'ge, 
io  that  it  is  impoiTible  for  any  one  to  profefshis  faith  but  in  words 
wliicli  are  capable  of  being  ufed  and  underftood  in  different  fenfes. 
For  inftancc — If  one  fliould  profefs  to  believe  in  Jefus  Chrifl  as- 
the  Son  of  God,  and  Saviour  of  maiikind  ;  it  is  not  cafy,  to  reck- 
on up  all  the  different  ways  in  which  this  propofiTion  has  proba- 
bly been  underftood  ;  the  different  notions  men  have  had  of  the 
perfDn  and  character  of  Chrill:,  the  character  of  God,  in  what 
fenfe  Jefus  is  Chrill:,  and  Son  cf  God,  and  Savi»iir  of  men  ;  and 
finally  what  is  the  import  of  believing  in  him.  Whoever 
believes  in  Chrill  in  the  proper  or  evangelical  fenfe  has  faving 
faith.  }]ut  the  objcil  of  faith  with  many  profeffors  is  not  the 
true  Chrill,  or  the  true  God  whom  the  Apoftles  preached  to  the 
world,  nor  do  they  in  a  proper  gofpel  fenfe  believeon  him. 

Since  then  the  language  of  mortals  is  and  will  be  ambiguoii? 
as  long  as  they  annex  different  ideas  to  the  fame  words,  and  con- 
fequently  whoever  profcffos  chriflianity  muft  do  it  in  languag;; 
fui>jccl  to  tills  great  imperfe^lion  and  inconvenience  ;  a  qucflion 
will  arifc — How  is  a  church  to  underftand  the  profelfions  which 
are  exhibited  from  time  to  time  ?  Are  they  to  take  them  in  a  good 
and  favourable  kw^ii,  when  the  words  will  fairly  admit  fuch  an 
interpretation,  and  no  rcafon  appears  for  unfavourable  furmifcs  ; 
or  arc  they  to  take  them  in  fome  fuppofeable  fenfe  contrary  to 
the  truth  and  fpirit  of  the  gofpel  ?  Now  the  rule  of  charity  is, 
whoever  profeflcs  iiis  faith  in  words  which  when  candidly  inter- 
preted agree  with  the  fcriptures,  is  prefumed  to  mca?i  tr.e  fame 
for  fubftance  which  the  inlpircd  writers  did,  and  confequentiy 
that  his  faith  is  found  and  will  fave  him. 

There  is  then  no  jull  foundation  for  the  odious  reproach 
vvhicli  has  been  caft  upon  fome,  for  faying  that  profcifions  of 
faith  arc  to  be  taken  in  a  favourable  fenfe,  though  delivcicd  in 
terms  capable  of  being  otherwife  undcrrtood  ;  as  if  they  meant 
tt>  cnrjuragj  defij^n-;.]  cmhiIx  jcjtiun     This  certainly  is  not  taking 

words 


The  Right  of  Admijjion  into  the  Church,  65 

words  in  a  favourable  or  equitable  fenfe.  If  any  think  they  can 
help  mankind  to  a  language  not  ambiguous,  or  can  effectually 
remedy  tliis  great  imperfeiStion,  that  To  men  may  no  mere  mif- 
underftand  each  other,  they  will  by  doing  this  perhaps  put  an  end 
to  almoft  all  difputes  among  chriitiuns,  and  remove  a  main  difii- 
culty  in  the  forming  of  pure  churches. 

But  aS  this  is  not  expetted  at  prefent,  we  mud,  if  we  profefs  our 
faith  at  all,  do  it  in  words  which  may  be  underflood  variouily. 
And  when  our  profefTion  fairly  holds  forth  a  good  fenfe,  and  is 
confonant  to  the  form  of  found  words  delivered  in  the  gofpel,  it 
would  be  injurious  as  well  as  uncharitable,  Tor  any  to  prefume, 
without  pofitive  evidence,  that  our  intended  meaning  is  unfound 
and  corrupt.  Every  found  profeffor,  is  in  the  charitable  account 
of  the  church,  a  true  believer,  unlefs  there  be  pofitive  proof  of  tho 
contrary.  And  the  beft  {cn^t  which  words  will  bear,  when  fairly 
and  candidly  interpreted,  muft  be  prefumed  to  be  the  true  in- 
tended meanin'j:. 


S  E  C  T  I  O  N    IV. 

Of  Proft'JJing  i?z  Moral  Sincerity, 

THE  difpute  VN^hich  has  been  warmly  agitated— Whether  It 
be  a  profelTion  of  godiinefs  or  a  profefTion  of  the  chriftian  religion 
in  moral  fincerity  which  give?  a  right  of  admiihon  to  external 
communion  has  rifen,  as  it  feems  to  me,  chiefly,  if  not  wholly 
from  mifunderftanding. 

For  they  who  maintain  that  a  profeflion  of  godiinefs  is  neceffa- 
ry,  declare  alfo  that  they  do  not  hold  it  neceHary  for  a  man  to  fay, 
or  even  believe  that  he  is  godly.  But  thofe  are  to  be  admitted 
who  exhibit  proper  evidence  of  this,  that  is,  fuch  evidence  as  may 
be  a  foundation  for  a  judgment  of  rational  charity. 

On  the  other  hand,  they  who  hold  that  a  profeifion  of  chrifli- 
anity  in  moral  fincerity  gives  a  right  of  adniiHion,  declare  wiilial 
that  they  mean  "  fuch  a  profeflion  as  flnll  make  it  vifible  or 
credible  to  a  judgment  of  rational  charity  that  men  are  favingly 
converted,  circumcifed  in  heart  ;  and  that  none  are  to  be  admit- 
ted, who  do  not  make  a  public  and  perfonal  profeflion  of  their 
faith  and  repentance  tothejuti  fatisfacVion  of  the  churcii  ;  none 
but  fuch  as  are,  in  a  judgment  of  rational  charity,  believers  ; 
and  carry  them  lei  ves  io  that  there  is  rcafon  to  look  up.on  theai 
to  be  faints."* 

I  A  prcfefuon 

*  S;oildard. 


66  Thf  R'l^ht  of  Jumljfton  huo  the  Church 

A  profcfiion  of  chrinianity  in  monl  finccrltv,  as  it  is  exp!alncd 
by  thofc  wlio  make  it  the  term  of  communion,  feems  to  come 
to  the  fame  cfrei5^  with  a  pmfediun  of  godlinefs,  as  that  is  ex- 
plained by  thofe  who  plead  for  the  nccifity  of  it.  Both  agree 
that  there  fhould  be  fuch  a  profcITion  as  Ihall  make  it  vifble,  or 
credible  to  a  judgment  of  charity,  that  the  profeilbr  is  a  true 
chriDian  ;  and  that  this  is  fufficient. 

It  will  be  faid,  that  profefilng  chriiVianity  in  moral  fincerity  is 
not  a  proper  and  credible  evidence  of  grace,  in  a  judgment  ot  ra- 
tional charily.  Let  us  then  examine  this  matter  a  little;  and  fee 
^vhcther  a  fair  and  candid  explanation  lUviy  not  fcrve  to  take  awny 
this  apt^le  ofjlrifc^  which  has  occafioned  hard  thoughts  and  trou- 
ble to  fo  many.  And  1  hope  the  friends  of  peace  and  charity  will 
not  difapprove  the  attempt. 

Some  have  declared  themfelves  at  a  lofs  to  underfland  what 
"moral  fincerity  is.  It  has  feemed  to  them  a  phrafe  without  any 
intelligible  determinate  meaning.  J  know  not  what  dark  vague 
notions  fome  may  have  had.  What  1  underftand  by  it  is  moral 
truth  \  that  is,  veracity^  aiming  to  cxprcfs  one's  real  fentiments  ;  in 
oppclltion  to  wilful  lying,  deceit,  prevarication,  and  mifreprefent- 
ation.  When  a  profefllT  aims  to  give  an  honeft  and  true  ac- 
count or  expreffion  of  his  religious  views,  and  purpofes,  he  is  mor- 
ally f.ncerc,  however  erroneous  his  fentiments  may  be,  or  howe- 
ver improperly  cxprelled.  An  infidel  or  heretic,  as  well  as  a 
found  believer  is  morally  llncere,  if  he  does  not  knowingly  and 
delignedly  niilreprefent  his  own  thoughts  ;  even  though  he  (bould 
exprefs  himlelf  io  improperly,  that  others  fliould  take  his  mean- 
ing to  be  different  from  what  he  really  intended.  The  phrafe  is 
alio,  though  mote  rarely,  applied  to  other  afis  befides  profefllon. 
So  a  man  may  be  faid  to  repent  in  moral  fincerity,  when  he  is  real- 
ly ferry  for  his  vicious  praiitices,  and  refoives  to  do  fo  no  more  ; 
thuugh  perhaps  his  repentance  may  not  be  evangelically  fincere, 
nor  Howing  fiom  golpel  principles  and  motives.  So  when  one 
coiifciUs  to  the  covenant  fincerely,  as  far  as  he  knows  himfeif, 
and  uridei  Hands  tlie  nature  and  tenor  of  its  propcfals,  lie  coni'^L-nts 
in  moral  iincerity  ;  that  is,  uneonfcious  of  Inpocrify  ;  however 
he  may  millakc  in  his  views,  and  his  heart  not  be  perfect  before 
C}od.  J-'ui  fliould  one  profefs  to  own  tlie  covenant,  while  he 
found  no  heait  tocorfcnt  to  what  he  r.nderllands  it  to  import,  he 
would  be  rnorai!)  inlii.ceic,  and  ct)nvicted  in  his  own  confcience 
crhypocrify. 

Gracious  finceritv,  1  conceive,  is  a  real  conformity  of  foul  in  its 
viewi  and  tempt r  to  the  iruih  and  fpirit  of  the  gofpel  ;  or  a  good 
a;Ul  iioncfl  heart  from  \\\c  inlluence  of  gofpel  principles  and  fandt- 
il;ing  grate. 

Whoever 


The  Right  of  Jdm'fffion  int!)  the  Curch,  6y 

Whoever  profefTes  chriftianity  In  moral  finceriry  profciTcs  to 
afTent  and  confent  to  it  really  and  heartily,  (o  far  as  he  under- 
(lands  it,  and  knows  himfelf,  whatever  doubts  he  inav  ha\e 
whether  he  have  that  fpiritual  difcernment  which  is  the  erTe5t  of 
faving  illuinination,  and  whether  his  heart  may  not  deceive  him. 
Let  us  now  examine  whether  we  may  and  ou;^ht  to  have  charity 
for  fuch  a  profelTor  :  to  repute  and  receive  hi'.n  as  one  who  is 
hopefully  a  true  chrillian. 

In  the  firCl:  place — It  is  fuppofcd  thnt  we  have  credible  evidence 
of  his  being  morally  iincere  in  the  account  he  gives  of  himlclf 
and  his  religion.  'Iliat  he  means  not  to  deceive  us.  That  he 
does  not  knowingly  and  wilfully  prevaricate,  difguife,  or  mifrc~ 
feat  his  fentiments.  Charity  obliges  us  to  think  thus  of  every 
one  Vvho  ferioully  pretends  to  fpeak  in  veracity,  and  gives  us  no 
fuilicient  rcafon  to  diihelieve  or  fufp-ed  it. 

Secondly.  It  is  fuppofed  that  he  profofTes  nfTent  and  ccnfent 
to  the  gofpel,  as  he  underilands  it,  and  fo  far  as  he  is  confcious 
of  the  actings  of  his  own  mind  and  heart.  And  furely  if  we  can 
have  confidence  in  his  veracity,  that  he  aims  not  to  deceive  us,  he 
mull:  be  allowed  to  be  a  competent  and  unexceptionable  wimefs 
of  this — Whether  he  believes  ciiriflianiiy  to  be  the  true  religion, 
and,  as  far  as  he  underdands  it,  approves  of,  and  confents  to  it, 
and  refolves  to  regulate  his  mind,  heart  at^d  life,  conformably  to 
this  rule. — P'or  this  is  matter  of  confcious  experience.  He  fpeaks 
of  what  he  knows,  and  teftifies  o^  what  he  fees  and  finds  in  him'- 
felf.  But  how  (liall  we  be  fatisiied  whether^he  rightly  underlhnds 
the  gofpel  }  Whether  what  he  prot'elles  may  not  be  a  falfe  notion, 
a  perverted  gofpel  j  and  not  that  truth  which  the  Apollles  be- 
lieved and  taught  ?  That  we  may  be  able  tojudge  of  tliis, 

Thirdly.  He  declares,  at  Icaii  in  fome  capital  and  fundamen- 
tal articles, how  he  underilands  the  dodlrineand  precepts  of  chrifii- 
aniry  which  he  profefles.  And  if  the  account  he  gives  of  his  re- 
hgious  fentiments,  difpofitions  and  purpofes,  when  fairly  and 
candidly  interpreted  and  compared  with  the  gofpel  revalation, 
appear  to  be  unexceptionable,  exprefling  the  truth  and  fpirit  of 
chriftianity.     Then, 

Fourthly.  Upon  the  tcftimony  of  the  gofpel  itfelf  we  may  be- 
lieve, that  he  whofe  fentiments,  difpofitions  and  endeavours  are 
conformable  to  the  doctrines  and  precepts  of  the  gofpel,  is  a  faint 
in  heart,  born  of  God,  and  (Ivall  be  favcd.  I  afk  now,  If  a  man 
fhall  in  moral  fincerity,  or  veracity,  exhibit  a  profcllionof  his  faith, 
repentance,  and  confent  to  the  covenant,  which,  when  examined 
by  the  gofpel,  Hiall  be  found  to  harmonize  with  it,  and  properly 
exprcfs  the  faith,  the  fpirit,  tlic  dcfires,  and  refolutions  of  a  true 

chriltian. 


68  The  Rr-hi  of  Aim'^jjion  into  the  Church. 

chnfthiijis  this  no  fufficicnt  ground  of  charity  ?  or  rather  what 
better  ground  can  any  profellion  give  ? 

Two  tilings  are  neccfiary  to  give  credibility  to  any  ones  tefti- 
mony  or  proteirion  ;  That  he  means  not  to  deceive  us ;  and  That 
be  is  not  deceived  himfeif.  We  may  be  as  well  fatisfied  that  a 
man  means  not  to  deceive  us,  as  we  are  that  he  is  morally  lincere. 
And  we  have  as  much  evidence  that  he  is  not  deceived,  as  we  have 
that  fhe  intended  meaning  of  his  profefilon  is  agreeable  to  the 
jiofpel. 

When  a  man  profefTcs  to  be  morally  hncere,  he  gives  tertimo- 
ny  to  a  ii^  in  which  he  can  fcarce  be  deceived.  Since  no  one 
can  wilfully  prevaricate  without  being  confcious  of  it  upon  the 
iird  refleiStion.  But  when  he  profefles  to  be  gracioully  fincere,  this 
is  a  fa£l  in  which  men  are  in  great  danger  of  being  deceived  : 
And  whatever  contidence  we  may  have  of  their  veracity,  their 
judgment  may  often  juftly  be  fufpcfied.  And  the  fcriptures  in- 
form us  not  VN  hat  is  the  fpiritual  ftate  of  any  particular  profefTor. 
Is  then  a  man's  profeflcd  nerfuafion  that  he  is  gracioully  fincere 
and  fa\  iiigly  intcreflcd  in  Cluift,  a  better  and  more  rational  ground 
of  charity,  than  if  he,  without  pretending  to  give  his  own  judg- 
ment concerning  his  fpiritual  ftate,  Ibould,  with  profefTions  and 
marks  of  veraciiy  or  moral  (incerity,  exprefs  the  fentiments,  temp- 
er, and  refoluiions  of  a  chriiVian  as  exhibited  in  the  gofpel  ?  Nay, 
Is  there  not  a  much  better  ground  of  charity  in  the  latter  cafe 
thsn  in  the  former  ? 

It  is  not  merely  ajprofcffion  of  mora!  fincerity  which  makes  one 
a  vifible  chrilVian.  No  one,  I  prcfume,  ever  meant,  orjaid  fo.  Nay 
a  profeffion  o\  infidelity,  or  aniichriftian  principles,  if  morally  fm- 
cere,  would  evidence  a  man  to  be  no  chrillian.  It  is  ^  proftjjion 
cfchriftianiiy\y^h\i:\\  recommends  to  the  charity  of  the  church. 
If  tliis  be  exhibited  in  moral  fincerity,  we  conclude  that  it  is  agree- 
able to  the  fentiments  of  the  profeHbr  :  If  it  be  alfo  agreeable  to 
the  gofpel,  we  conclude  that  it  is  found  and  good.  And  ccnfe- 
(juently  that  the  pro:clTor  is  a  found  believer,  and  good  chriHian. 
And  we  know  that  all  fuch  are  gracioufly  fincere,  and  will  be 
faved.* 

It  is  true  a  man  may  profcfs  and  fccm  to  be  morally  (incerc, 
when  he  is  not  fo.  And  iiowever  fincere,  he  may  exprefs  himfeif 
improperly  ;  which  may  occafion  mifundcrftandmg  and  error  in 
the  judgment  of  the  church  concerning  his   faith.     His  exprcf- 

iions 

•  Mr.  Stovldnnl  lu-U!  iltat  a  j^rcfclTion  of  faith  nnd  rcprntanre  in  nioral 
fincerity  is  a  credible  cvidtncc  of  laving  t;racr.— "  Such  a  proftflioti"  lays 
lie,  **  as  bi-in^  fiMCCTe  makes  a  man  a  real  luint,  bcinp  morally  lincere  makes 
liini  a  vifible  lamt. "—Grace  makes  one  a  real  laint,  crcdibiccvjdcr.ee  wf 
grace,  a  viliblc  laint. 


Tfje  kigkt  of  Abmjjlon  Into  the  Church,  6f 

fions  may  be  unexceptionable,  when  his  intended  meaning  is  un- 
found.  And  therefore,  as  was  TaiJ  before,  no  profeffion  a  man 
can  make  will  certainly  manifell  him  to  be  a  real  chrillian.  Nor 
is  this  necedary  in  order  to  his  being  evidently  a  proijer  objc»5l  of 
chriftian  charily,  a  vifible  faint,  qualified  for  admifiion  into  an 
inftituted  church. 

Obj.  I.  It  may  be  objected  ihzii  favlng  faith  is  the  condition 
qf  an  intereft  in  the  covenant,  and  a  title  to  the  feals  thereof; 
and  a  profeflion  of  this  is  requifite  as  a  condition  of  admiffion  to 
them. 

j^nfvj.  It  is  not  grace,  but  evidences  of  grace,  not  certain  but 
credible  evidences  v.-hich  confritute  a  vifible  faint,  and  give  a  right 
of  admiiTion.  A  profeflion  of  the  chriAian  religion,  witli  credi- 
ble marks  of  moral  fincerity,  is  evidence  of  fomcthing  more  and 
better  than  moral  fincerity  ;  even  that  a  man  is  a  true  chriHian, 
It  is  the  condition  or  qualification  to  which  a  right  of  admiflion 
is  annexed.  The  covenant  propofes  not  only  terms  of  falvaticn, 
but  terms  of  external  church  communion.  Inward  fancVificatiori 
is  the  condition  of  the  former ;  vifible  fainlfhip  of  the  latter. 
Credible  profefibrs  are  vifible  faints.  They  who  profefs  chriilian- 
ity  in  moral  fincerity,  are  credible  profefTors.  "  It  is  a  miferable 
miftake,"  fays  Mr.  Shepard,  "  to  think  that  inward  real 
holinefs  is  the  only  ground  of  admiflion  to  church  membcifhip, 
as  fom.e  Anabaptifts  difpute  :  But  it  is  federal  holinefs,  whether 
externally  profelTed  as  in  grown  perfons,  or  gracioully  promifed 
to  their  feed."* 

Obj.  2.  Moral  fincerity  is  a  tranncnt  vanifliing  quality,  and 
fo  is  no  fit  qualification  for  a  ftanding  privilege.     1  anfwer — 

Since  it  is  not  the  reality  but  evidence  of  grace  which  gives  a 
right  of  admifiion,  I  would  afk,  what  evidence  can  be  exhibited 
by  profeffion,  which  can  more  be  confided  in  as  unfailing  ?  Do 
not  thofe  who  profefs  to  be  faints  in  heart  often  fall  away  ?  A 
profeffion  of  chriflianity,  in  moral  fincerity,  for  what  yet  appears, 
is  as  likely  not  to  fail,  as  any  profeflion  which  can  be  made.  When 
any  fall  away  from  the  chri(\ian  profeflion,  or  dcfiroy  the  credit 
of  it,  they  forfeit  the  privileges  of  chriflian  communion,  l^he 
privilege  is  as  vanilhing  as  the  qualification  for  it. 

V/hoever  is  qualified  for  admifTion  is/"/  for  it.  Vifible  faints 
are  qualified.  Credible  profefixirs  are  vifible  faints.  A  profeffion 
cf  chrlfiiLinity  in  moral  fincerity  is  credible,  as  has  been  faid. 
This  gives  that  fitnefs  of  which  we  now  fpeak  ;  and  wiiich  the 
rule  of  admiffion  requires — If  any  who  were  regularly  admitted 
become  uiifit  to   continue  members,  this  proves  not  that  they 

were 

*  Church  Menibcrfhip  of  Children,  p;agc  13. 


7^  TJje  Right  of  AdmtJJion  into  thi  Church, 

were  unfit  wlien  they  were  admitted.  It  is  uncharitable  for  us 
tojudge  a  credible  profeflbr  to  be  unconverted.  Hut  if  v»e  Hiould 
fo  judge  of  any  one  j  yea,  if  an  angel  from  heaven  fliould  declare 
that  he  was  unconverted,  yet  if  he  made  an  unexceptionable 
profefTion  of  chrillianity,  and  were  not  fcandalous,  1  fee  not  how 
he  could  be  refufed  without  tranTgreffing  the  rule  of  the  gofpcl. 
It  is  not  our  believing  a  piofefibr  to  be  fmcere,  which  makes  it  our 
duty  to  receive  him,  but  it  is  the  conformity  of  his  profclTion  to 
the  gofpel,  not  difcredited  by  a  fcandalous  life.  Chrill  who  knew 
the  hearts  of  men,  admitted  fome  into  the  number  of  his  difciples 
wiio  were  not  true  believers  on  him.  He  was  no  un\sire  build- 
er, nor  did  he  put  unfit  materials  into  his  church.  But  he  rs- 
ccived  thofe  who  exhibited  the  qualilications  required  by  his  o\mi 
rule,  though  he  knew  that  many  of  them  would  not  contii^ue  in 
his  word. 

Indeed  a  Handing  in  the  vlfible  churcli  is  a  privilege  of  no  long 
duration  to  any.  And  it  is  in  vain  to  think  of  fonr.iiig  an  inAi- 
tuted  church  of  durable  materials.  We  (lull  all  be  fccn  cut  off 
from  the  vifiblc  church  by  death,  if  we  ihould  not  be  cafi  out  of 
it  before.  And  while  we  remain  in  it,  may  fitly  enough  be  com- 
pared to  ^^  Llocks  of  ice'''  in  a  building,  daily  melting  away.  And 
this  waftc  is  no  otherwife  repaired  than  by  a  fucccfr.ve  accefHon 
of  new  members,  who  will  in  the  courfe  of  nature  foon  fade  and 
fall  off  like  '-^  leaves.^'  The  inilituted  church  is  but  as  a  tent  pro- 
vided for  our  accomn^.odation,  while  we  fojourn  in  this  s\ilder- 
nefs.  It  is  the  invifible  church  alune  to  which  chriftians  hiavs  a 
permanent  union.  In  this  houfe  of  the  Lord  they  are  built  up 
as  lively  flones,  and  will  dwell  therein  forever. 

(Jlj.  3.  If  a  profelTion  of  moral  fmcerity  give  a  right  of  ad- 
mliricn,  the  greatcrt  part  of  church  members  are  like  to  be  fuch 
profcflbrs  as  are  not  even  morally  lincere.  Since  moral  flnccrity 
without  grace,  commonly  foon  fails  and  is  loft.     I  anfvNcr — 

it  is  nor  finccrity  of  any  kind  which  gives  a  right  of  admilfion, 
but  credible,  though  uncertain  evidence  of  it.  It  is  not  evidence, 
of  moral  fmcerity  merely  and  abdradily  confidcred,  which  give  a 
right  of  admlfTiunjbut  as  connected  with,  and  giving  credibility  to  a 
found  profclTion  of  chriifianity.  Ifthofc  who  give  evidence  of  f.n- 
ccriry  are  Lcrctly  hypocrites,  this  is  no  bar  to  their  being  received. 
When  they  mnniftft  hypocrify  ihcy  arc  to  bercjeckd.  This  rule 
duly  obfervcd,  the  church  will  r.evcr  confill  chiefiv  of  profcflbrs  vif-' 
iblv  iiifmcererNny,  notone  vilibie  hypocrite  will  bo  admitted  tc,  or 
fufierod  to  continue  in  external  communion.  liut  we  have  iio 
rule  for  excluding  concealctl  hypocrites,  how  many  focver.  And 
it  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  charity  to  judpe  theni  to  be  fuch. 

Obj.  4.  A  man  may  profefs  chrilVinnity  in  mural  fmcerity 
while  living  in  heinous  wickcdncfs,     1  aiif.vcr—-  It 


ne  Right  of  Admiffion  into  the  Church,  mi 

It  IS  not  the  heinoufnefs  of  men's  fins,  which  makes  them  un- 
fit to  be  admitted  ;  but  it  is  iheir  being  fcandalous.  Credible 
profefTors,  not  fcandalous,  have  a  right  of  admifilon,  however 
heinous  their  wickednefs  may  be  fuppofed.  Scandalous  perfons 
are  to  be  rejcvfied,  not  becaufe  they  are  judged  to  be  gracelels  ; 
(we  need  not  judge  their  ftate)  but  becaufe  they  are  vifibjy  unfit 
for  communion. 

I  have  briefly  touched  thefe  obje^lions,  fo  far  as  the  rule  and 
right  of  admiiTion  might  feem  to  be  affeded  by  them  ;  though  J 
am  fcnfible  that  the  principal  aim  of  thofe  who  urge  them,  is  to 
prove  that  moral  fmcerity  in  profefhng  chriftianity,  does  not  give 
any  one  a  lawful  right  to  come  into  and  have  aclive  comniunion  with 
aninftituted  church  in  the  ufe  of  fpecial  ordinances  ;  but  that  god- 
ly fincerity  is  a  neccdary  qualification  for  this.  We  fhall  therefore 
have  occafion  to  conlider  thefe  things  further,  when  we  come  to 
confider,  who  have  a  right  of  accefs  to  the  fpecial  privileo-es  ot 
rightful  church  members. 

The  ilTue  and  refult  of  our  enquiries  may  be  fummarily  deliv- 
ered in  the  rule  following,  viz. 

All  who  give  evidence  of  a  competent  underftanding  of  the 
fundamental  articles  of  th^  chriftian  religion,  and  with  credible 
marks  of  veracity,  or  moral  fincerity,  profefs  their  aiTent  and 
confent  to  them,  not  overthrowing  the  credibility  of  their  pro- 
felhon  by  fcandalous  errors  or  practices  joined  with  it,  are  vifible 
faints,  and  to  be  reputed  true  chriftians  in  a  judgment  of  charity, 
and  to  be  loved  and  treated  as  fuch :  And  upon  their  requcft,  and 
confenting  to  a  covenant  of  confederation,  are  to  be  admitted  as 
members  of  an  inftituted  church,  together  with  their  children, 
and  to  all  fuch  privileges  of  communion  as  they  ap^>€ar  adiually 
capable  of,  and  meet  for. 


SECTION    V. 

The  P^ijjt  of  JdniiJJion  to  full  Comtnunion  confidered — JVho  arc  tlit 
SuhjeSU  of  it, 

AFTER  what  has  been  difcourfed  of  the  right  of  admiliion 
into  the  church  as  members,  it  will  be  no  long  or  difficult  tafk 
to  detinc  and  ftate  in  a  general  way,  who  have  a  right  to  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  fpecial  privileges  of  members  in  full  communion. 

l^liis  didiniftion  of  niembers  into  thofe  who  are  confirmed, 
perfect,  in  tull  communion,  or  complete  landing,  and  thofe  who 
are  noi  fo,  is  generally  acknowledged  in  ail  churches,  excc^;t  ihcfe 

of 


;  2  The  Right  of  Admijfion  hiio  the  Church, 

of  tlie  Anabaptift^  :  And  it  appears  to  have  been  received  from 
the  carlicrt  ages  of  tlie  church.  This  is  not  to  be  underl^ood  as 
if  any  who  belonged  to  the  church  were  but  laljincmhcrs^  or  not 
really,  completely,  and  perfcitly  Tjch  ;  but  that  fomc  by  reafon 
of  their  unhrnefs  and  inci^pacity  to  have  adlive  comtnunion  with 
the  church  in  feme  ordinances,  or  to  ufe  them  to  the  glory  of 
Ciod,  and  tlieir  own  fpiritual  comfort  and  benefit,  are  not  at 
prefcnt  to  be  admitted  to  them.  Though  all  rightful  members 
have  a  r/;/'/  of  hcirjhip  to  all  the  external  privileges  of  an  inftitut- 
ed  church,  yet  as  heirs  in  minority,  they  are  not  admitted  to 
polT^-fs  and  ufe  all  privileges  at  tlieir  difcretion,  till  they  appear  to 
be  aflually  meet  for,  and  capable  of  it  in  lomc  competent  mcaf- 
ure. 

The  fpccial  external  privileges  of  members  in  full  communion 
are  chiefly  thefe  two — A  right  to  partake  at  tlie  Lord's  fupper, 
and  to  give  their  votes  with  the  church  in  fuch  matters  as  come 
under  their  cognizance.  The  latter  is  in  our  churches  limited 
to  tlie  brotlierhood,  agreeable  to  an  apodolic  canon,  which  fuffers 
not  a  woinan  to  fpeak,  or  give  her  voice  in  the  church,  or  to  u- 
furp  authority  over  the  man,  but  to  be  in  fubjeition.  But  mem- 
bers of  either  fex  are  admitted  alike  to  the  Lord's  fupper. 

A  right  of  admillion  to  the  privileges  of  a  member  in  full  com- 
munion beloncrs  only  to  thofe  who  exhibit  fome  meafure  of  a^w 
al  fitncfs  to  attend  and  improve  thole  fpecial  ordinances  and  pri- 
vileges in  fuch  a  manner,  as  that  the  ends  of  their  inditutioa 
may  be  anfwered  in  them. 

They  fliouM  manifcrt  fo  much  fpiritual  knowledge,  fuch  eflab- 
lifhment  in  their  holy  faith,  fuch  difpofiticns  of  piety,  as  may 
give  reafon  to  hope  thjt  they  will  adorn  their  profcffion  by  an 
trxempUry  life.  It  lliould  alfo  appear  that  they  fo  far  underftand 
the  nature,  the  ends,  and  proper  ufes  of  tl.e  Lord's  fupper,  as  to 
be  capable  ot"  examining  tliemfclvcs,  and  difceming  the  Lord's 
body,  and  fo  citing  that  bread,  and  drinking  that  cup  in  remem- 
brance of  him,  as  that  their  fouls  may  be  nourilbcd  by  the  bread 
of  life,  and  their  fpiritual  edification  fubferved  and  promoted. 
Not  that  high  attainments  in  chrillian  knowletlge  and  piety  need 
to  be  exhibited  to  give  one  a  right  of  admilhon  ;  but  fuch  only 
as  may  manitcft  a  capacity,  and  difpofition,  in  the  ufe  of  fuch 
licl;^s  and  ad/antaj^cs  .is  are  enJo}ed  in  the  church,  to  ufe  fpccial 
ordinances  to  the  glory  of  God,  the  lionour  of  the  clinftian  pro- 
fjlfion,  and  the  fpiritual  benefit  of  the  communicant.  And  per- 
haps there  are  few  adult  profefTors  qualified  ibr  admillion  as  mem- 
bers, might  not  aifo  be  regularly  and  properly  admitted  to  full 
J  mm  union. 

CHAP. 


Th  Right  ofA-cefs  to  th  Privileges  of  External  Gornmunlon,    73J 


CHAP.      V. 


Of  the  RIGHT  of  ACCESS  to  the  PRIVILEGES   ^/EX-i 
TERNAL  COMMUNION. 


SECTION    I. 

The  Right  of  Accefs  explained  and  difllnguijhed -,  founded  not  in  the 
Reality  but  Evidence  of  Grace  in  the  view  of  Confcience. — 4If^ii^^ 
ance^  certain  Evidence^  prevailing  Perfuafion^  preponderating  Prob* 
ability  of  Grace  not  tieceffary. 

ARIGHT  of  coming  Into  an  inflltuted  church,  of  joining 
to  it  as  a  rightful  member,  of  having  adive  external  commu- 
nion with  it  in  a  joint  ufe  of  fpecial  ordinances  and  privileges,  I 
Ihall,  for  brevity  of  expreffion,  call — Aright  of  accefs. 

This  implies  a  right  in  the  proponant,  to  do  all  that  isneccfla- 
ry  to  be  done  on  his  part,  in  order  to  his  becoming  a  member, 
and  ufing  the  privileges  of  one  :  That  is,  to  propofe  himfelf  as  a 
candidate,  and  afk  admiflion  ;  to  make  fuch  a  profefllon  of 
chriilianity  as  may  be  to  the  juft  fatisfadion  of  the  church,  that  he 
is  a  proper  object  of  chriftian  charity,  and  ought  to  be  received  as 
fuch  j  to  take  upon  himfelf  the  bond  of  the  covenant,  and  attend 
upon  thofe  ordinances  which  belong  only  to  rightful  members. 

The  queftion  then  is,  who  have  this  right  of  accefs,  as  above 
explained ;  a  queftion  v;hlch  perhaps  may  be  thought  more  diffi- 
cult to  be  refolved  upon  certain  and  fafe  grounds,  than  that  con- 
cerning the  right  of  admilTion.  And  it  is  well  known  that  chrif- 
tians  liave  been  divided  in  their  judgment  upon  it;  and  the  con- 
fciences  of  many  have  been  burdened  with  fcruples,  of  v»hich 
they  never  could  be  fully  eafed.  For  however  plain  it  may  be 
that  a  profedbr  may  and  ought  to  be  admitted,  yet  if  his  right  of 
accefs  be  not  good  and  valid,  he  is  not  a  rightful  member,  but 
has  intruded  without  warrant,  and  mud  anfwcr  for  his  prefump- 
tion. 

It  is  plain  that  the  cafe  before  us  is  q\ilte  dlfllncl:  from  that 
which  we  have  been  confidering  ;  and  is  to  be  refolved  upon  dif- 
ferent grounds  and  principles. 

The  qualilications  to  which  the  right  of  admiflion  is  annexed 
are  vifible  to  the  church,  viz.  external  holinefs,  a  profelTion  of 
faith.  But  the  qualifications  which  give  a  right  of  accefs  are  featcd 
K  in 


74-    7/'^  Rightof  Accfs  to  the  Privileges  of  External  Commwiia,:, 

ill  the  inward  parts  of  a  man,  his  mind  and  heart,  and  cannot 
be  fccn  by  others.     I'herefore, 

It  belongs  to  the  church  to  judge  who  have  a  right  of  admif- 
fion  :  But  they  cannot,  and  pretend  not  to  determine  who  have 
a  right  of  accefs.  This  cafe  is  judged  in  a  different  court,  even 
that  of  a  man's  own  confcience.  Each  one  muft  judge  and  de- 
termine this  for  himfclf. 

Again.  The  right  of  accefs  differs  from  tliat  of  admiffion  in 
its  immediate  object.  The  right  of  admiffion  is  a  right  to  have 
a  privilege  granted  \.o  the  fubjed.  The  right  of  accefs  is  a  right 
to  do  certain  aSiions,  The  former  might  be  called  for  diftin(5^ion 
a  pajjtvc  right^  or  titlc^  the  latter,  an  adiive  right,  or  warraiU. 

Further.  They  differ  remarkably  in  their  foundations.  The 
right  of  admiffion  is  founded  in  the  covenant  grant  of  fpecial  pri- 
vileges to  fuch  as  have  the  qualifications  fpeeified.  But  the  right 
of  accefs  is  founded  in^  cr  artfes  from  a  fufficient  reafon  in  the  view 
of  the  fulje^.  Whatever  any  one  fees  a  good  reafon  for  doing,  he 
has  a  right  to  do.  71iis,  and  this  only,  gives  a  fufficient  war- 
rant. 

No  one  can  as5l  morally  without  fome  reafon.  Nothing  can 
be  a  reafon  t®  any  one  till  he  has  a  view  or  apprehenfion  of  it  : 
Nor  has  he  a  right  to  a(fl  upon  any  reafon  or  motive  unlefs  it 
appear  to  him  good  and  fufficient,  arid  be  r;^ /;//>' judged  to  be  fo. 
If  we  judge  the  reafons  prompting  us  to  do  an  action,  to  be  fuf- 
ticient  when  they  arc  not,  our  unrcafonable  judgment  gives  us  no 
right  to  adt  according  to  it.  It  is  an  unfaithful  guide,  and  ought 
to  be  corrected.  It  mufl  be  the  dilate  of  a  right  coyfciencc,  dif- 
cerning  and  approving  the  reafons  for  doing  any  thing,  to  give 
us  a  right  or  warrant  to  do  it. 

But  it  is  to  be  remembered,  tliat  when  we  judge  according  to 
our  rule,  and  the  evidence  we  are  to  proceed  upon,  our  judg- 
ment is  morally  and  praiftically  riglu,  though  the  fa6\s  judged 
of  fhould  be  really  otherwife,  than  we  take  them  to  be.  Tlie 
evidence  upon  which  we  arc  to  form  our  judgment  in  many  cafes 
is  not  infallible,  and  fo  leaves  us  uncertain  what  is  the  real  truth 
of  tiie  faft.  But  our  judgment  is  certainly  right  and  reafpnablc, 
if  it  be  conformable  to  rule  and  evidence,  whether  it  be  conform- 
able or  not  to  the  truth  and  reality  of  the  thing.  The  prajflical 
judgment,  or  the  di(f>atc  of  the  confcience  what  we  may  or 
ou'^.ht  to  do,  may  be  right  and  fure,  when  the  fpcculativc  judg- 
ment is  doubtful  or  miflnken.  Thus,  there  are  many  who  doubt 
wliether  they  are  lit  fc>r  the  privileges  of  cxteriul  communion 
with  an  inlVjiuted  church,  or  entitled  to  them  by  a  covenant 
gram  ;  and  yet  the  reafons  pcrfuading  them  to  -fl;  fur  admillion, 
and  attend  the  a  dm  in  ill  rat  ion  cf  fpecial  ordinances,  may  be  fuch 

as 


7he  Right  ofAcceJsio  the  Privileges  of  External  Communion,     75 

as  their  confciences,  when  rightly  informed,  mud  judge  fufficient 
to  warrant  their  coming.  Their  title  to  the  privilege  may  be 
doubtful  to  the  fpeculative  judgment,  becaufe  fupported  only  by 
probable  evidence.  But  their  zvarrant  to  come  and  take,  and  life 
the  privilege  may  be  certain  and  evident  to  the  pradical  judg- 
ment ;  becaufe  probable  evidence  is  certainly  a  fufficient  reafon  for 
us  to  determine  our  conduct  by  in  numberlefs  cafes,  and  in  this 
in  particular.  IT  they  have  fo  much  evidence  of  their  title  as 
amounts  to  a  fufficient  reafon  for  them  to  act  upon,  this  is  enough 
to  put  it  out  of  doubt,  that  their  condu£l  may  and  ought  to 
be  determined  by  it  :  I'hat  is,  they  have  a  right  or  zvarrant  to 
a£t  accordingly. 

This  then  we  lay  down  as  a  principle,  or  maxim.  No  one 
has  a  right  or  warrant  to  come  into  the  church,  who  has  not  fuf- 
ficient reafon  for  doing  fo,  in  the  view  of  his  own  mind  ;  and 
whoever  has  fuch  a  reafon  has  undoubtedly  a  warrant  to  come, 
whatever  doubts  he  may  have  refpeding  his  fpiritual  flatc,  and 
whatever  his  ftate  may  be  fuppofed  to  be.  A  good  reafon  in 
view,  is  a  good  foundation,  and  the  only  foundation  for  tlie  dic- 
tate of  a  right  confcience  that  we  have  a  warrant  to  do  any  thing. 
It  is  vain  to  imagine  any  deeper  or  more  fubflantial  foundation 
necefTary.  It  is  evidence  alone  which  gives  a  right  to  a£^,  for  this 
only  can  furnifh  the  mind  with  a  good  reafon  for  its  conduct. 
Inevident  realities  no  more  afFeft  our  warrant  in  this  cafe  than  it 
they  had  no  exigence. 

Hence  it  appears  that  inv/ard  fancStification,  while  inevident, 
gives  no  right  of  accefs.  He  who  knows  not  that  he  is  a  true 
faint  msy  have  a  covenant  title  to  the  invifible  grace  and  bleffings 
of  the  gofpel.  But  while  this  is  fecret  to  him  it  can  be  no  rcajoyi 
in  his  mind,  no  warrant  for  coming  to  ordinances.  If  grace 
was  that  qualification  which  of  itfelfgave  a  right  of  accefs,  then 
all  true  faints  would  have  a  warrant  to  come  at  all  times.  But 
this  is  not  true.  Their  warrant  muft  be  evident  to  them.  It 
is  not  valid,  and  may  not  be  afted  upon,  till  it  is  acknowledged 
and  figned  in  the  court  of  confcience.  It  is  not  lawful  for  us  to 
do  any  thing  without  the  approbation  of  the  judge  in  our  own 
breafl:.  An  inevident  warrant  is  a  nullity  :  It  gives  no  right  to 
do  any  thing  :  It  is  not  the  fuppofed  reality  of  inevident  qualifi- 
cations, but  it  is  the  evidence  we  difcern  of  our  title  to  privileges 
which  gives  us  a  right^  a  reafon^  a  warrant  to  afk  for  and  improve 
them. 

It  may  be  faid,  though  it  is  not  grace,  but  the  evidence  of  It, 
which  immediately  determines  the  judgment  or  didate  of  the 
confcience,  and  {o  furnifncs  us  with  a  reafon  or  warrant  for  com- 
ing into  the  church,  vet  grace  itfelf  is  a  neccffiry  qualification, 

that 


^6     The  Right  of  Acceji  t:  the  Privileges  of  External  Communicn, 

that  our  right  or  warrant  for  coming  may  have  a  proper  and  folid 
foundation.  That  is,  it  is  neceflary  as  a  foundation  for  that  evi- 
dence of  grace,  and  that  judgment  or  didhte  of  our  own  confci- 
encc,  to  whicli  our  right  of  accefs  is  annexed.     I  anfwcr — 

It  is  granted,  that  a  man  muft  have  evidence  in  liis  own  mind 
of  inward  fancliiicaticn,  in  order  to  his  having  a  riglit  to  join 
himfclf  to  a  church.  I  mean  fufficient  evidence  to  be  a  good 
jeafon  for  his  doing  fo.  And  I  grant  alfo,  that  if  none  but  true 
faints  have  fuch  evidence  as  to  furnifh  them  with  a  fufficient  rca- 
fon  for  coming,  then  fan6tifying  grace  is  neccHary  as *^  folid 
foundation  for  a  right  of  accefs.  But  if  fome  who  are  not  true 
faints  may  have  fuch  evidence  of  fanctification,  as  may  furnifh 
tlicm  with  a  fufhdent  reafon  for  coming,  then  inward  fanctihca- 
tion  is  not  neceflary  as  a  foundation  for  a  right  of  accefs.  But 
whether  any,  except  true  faints,  have  good  reafon  to  afk  for,  or 
i]fe  the  privileges  of  church  members,  is  a  queftion  we  fliall  let 
re  A  for  the  prcfent.  We  may  be  able  to  judge  betftr  of  this, 
vhen  we  have  confidered  wlio  have  a  good  reafon  for  joining 
themfelves  to  a  church,  and  ufing  fpccial  ordinances  :  and  what 
evidence  of  inward  fanctification  a  man  muft  have  in  his  own 
inindj  that  he  may  have  a  reafonable  inducement  to  do  fo.  To 
proceed  then — 

When  the  point  to  be  determined  is,  whether  I  may  or  ought 
to  come  into  tlie  church,  and  ufe  the  privileges  of  a  member,  or 
not,  the  better  and  weightier  reafon  for  either  alternative  is  fuf- 
ficient to  determine  the  pradical  judgment,  though  it  may  leave 
room  tor  the  fpcculative  judgment  to  doubt  of  my  fpiriruai  Hate, 
In  fpeculation,  a  Wronger  probable  reafon  does  not  make  it  certain 
that  that  is  true^  which  is  fupportcd  by  it.  For  what  appears 
probable  fometimes  is  found  not  to  be  true.  But  even  in  fpecu- 
laiion  the  ilronger  reafon  ought  to  turn  the  fcale  of  aflent  againfl 
a  weaker,  though  it  can  only  bc^et  a  doubting  opinion.  But 
in  praflice,  the  ilronger  and  better  reafon  is  a  fufficient  ground 
tor  a  fure  dictate  of  confcience,  determining  what  I  may  and 
ought  to  do.  For  it  is  certainly  my  duty  and  right  to  a6l  agree- 
ably to  tlie  befl  light  that  I  have,  and  dctcrir.i::e  my  conduct  by 
a  Wronger  reafon,  rather  than  by  a  weaker  prefumption  to  the 
contrary.  If  1  have  credible,  though  uncertain  evidence  that  I 
am  euliti'edy  according  to  the  gofpcl  rule,  to  the  privilege  of  be- 
ing a  member  of  a  cliurch,  I  have  a  weightier  reafon  for  coming 
and  ufmg  this  privilege,  than  1  have  for  ncglcitir.g  to  do  fo. 
And  I  am  fure  that  it  is  not  only  my  right  but  duty  to  determine 
my  conduct  according  to  the  weightier  and  beticr  reafon  ;  fo  that 
in  lliis  cafe  the  confcience  or  practical  judgment  may  certainly  de- 
termine that  1  have  u  right  or  uarrant  to  come  accordingly,  ^^'c 

pficn 


The  Right  of  Jcccfs  to  the  Privileges  of  External  CommmuGn.     {77 

often  haveoccafion  to  form  a  judgment  upon  uncertain  evidence  : 
And  if  we  judge  fairly,  and  according  to  the  rule  and  evidence, 
our  judgment  is  right,  though  it  fhould  not  be  conformable  to 
the  real  nature  of  things.  And  the  didate  oi"  confcience  ref- 
pe6iing  our  conduit  in  this  cafe  is  right  TLiidJurc^  notwithftanding 
doubts  or  miftakes  of  the  fpeculative  judgment  arifmg  from  the 
want  of  more  certain  evidence.  Our  right  and  warrant  to  acl 
or  condu'ft  ourfelves,  in  many  cafes,  arifes  from  reafons  in  our 
own  minds  grounded  on  evidence  of  faits  which  we  know  to 
be  uotertain.  But  our  rights  and  duties  grounded  oh  tiiis  un- 
certain evidence  arc  facrcd  and  fure. 

Whoever  therefore,  upon  a  fair  judgment  of  the  cafe,  accord- 
ing to  the  gofpel  rule,  finds  Wronger  and  better  reafons  to  think 
it  his  right  and  duty  to  become  a  member  of  an  inftituted  church 
and  attend  its  fpccial  ordinances,  has  a  right  to  come,  yea,  is 
bound  to  do  fo  ;  notwithftanding  any  doubts  he  may  have  vvheth- 
tv  his  qualifications  be  fuch  as  give  him  a  covenant  title  to  thcfe 
privileges.  If  he  has  reafon  to  think  it  probable  that  thefe  privi- 
leges are  granted  to  him,  and  that  he  is  commanded  to  take  and 
ufe  them,  he  may  be  certaijz  that  he  has  fironger  reafons  to  feek 
accefs  to  them  than  to  neglect  them  •  that  it  is  his  duty  to  deter- 
mine his  condu'ft  by  thefe  ftronger  reafons  rather  than  by  a 
weaker  prefumption  to  the  contrary  :  And  that  he  has  a  right  to 
do  what  is  molt  reafonable  to  be  done  in  the  calc  fuppofed. 

Though  it  is  granted  that  none  have  fufHcicnt  reafons  and  war- 
rants for  coming  into  the  church  in  the  judgment  of  confcience 
when  rightly  informed  but  they  who  find  a^edible  marks  or  evi- 
dences of  faniStifying  grace.  Yet  I  would  not  be  underflocd  to 
afi^ert  that  it  is  neceffary  for  a  man  to  be  afiured,  or  confidently  or 
prevailingly  perfuaded  of  his  being  inwardly  fanftified.  It  is  one 
think  to  difcern  credible  figns  and  evidences  of  grace,  and  another 
to  be  perfuaded  we  are  really  the  fubjctSts  of  it.  As  there  are  many 
who  cannot  but  be  confcious  of  black  marks  of  hypocrify  upon 
them,  who  yet  will  confidently  prefume  their  ftate  is  good,  upon 
miftaken  principles  ;  fo  there  niay  be  many  v.  ho  alfo  upon  mif- 
taken  principles,  draw  fad  conclufions  againfi  themfelvcs,  not- 
withftanding they  are  confcious  of  fuch  figns  of  finceriiy  as  inight 
reafonably  encourage  comfortable  hopes.  They  find  not  but  that 
they  heartily  believe  the  chriftian  religion,  and  defsre  to  have 
their  liearis  and  lives  conformed  to  it,  and  yet  judge  themfelvcs 
to  be  unconverted,  becaufe  not  confcious  that  they  have  been 
turned  from  a  fiateof  fin  and  impcnitency  in  fuch  a  way,  and  fuch 
a  fenfible  order  in  their  experiences,  as  they  fu}Mj>ofe  is  neceffary 
to  a  found  converficn.  Perhaps  they  have  never  been  fully  con- 
vinced or  being  in  z  (late  of  impcnitency,  enemies  to  God,  dead 

in 


78     TJje  Right  of  Accefi  to  the  Privileges  5/  External  Communicn^ 

in  trefparfcs  and  fins ;  which  they  are  told  is  an  evidence  that 
tlicy  are  fiill  in  a  rtate  of  unrenewed  niturc  :  not  confidering  that 
they  who  are  under  tl^e  influence  of  fan£lifying  grace  from  their 
earlieft  rcnicmbrance,  never  find  themfelvcs  in  a  ftate  of  nature, 
and  cannot  be  truly  convinced  that  they  are  enemies  to  God. 
Eut  it  would  be  cndlcfs  to  reckon  up  the  doubts  and  fcruples 
with  which  many  chrilVians  are  troubled,  thro'  the  darknefs  and 
miftakcs  of  their  own  minds,  the  workings  of  fm  and  vanity 
within  tlicm,  the  power  of  temptations,  and  the  weaknefs  of  their 
faith  and  graces  ;  whereby  they  may  be  hindered  from  crediting 
or  taking  the  comfort  of  thofe  evidences  of  fan<5\ification  they 
lind  in  ihemfclves.  Therefore  it  is  not  a  man's  being  pcrfuaded 
whether  more  or  lefs  conlidently  of  his  being  a  true  faint  which 
gives  him  a  riglit  of  accefs,  but  it  is  his  finding  in  himfelf  hope- 
ful figns  of  chriflian  piety.  What  thefe  figns  are  in  particular 
we  muft  learn  from  the  fcripturcs.  And  this  enquiry  fliall  be  at- 
tended to  prefcntly.  But  whoever  iinds  thefe  in  himfelf  has  a 
warrant  to  join  himfelf  to  the  church  ;  whatever  his  prevailing 
judgment  may  be  concerning  his  fpiritual  Hate. 

It  is  acknowledged  by  all  that  fome  ought  to  come  Into  tJie 
churcli,  and  fo  have  a  right^  a  good  reafon  to  do  fo,  who  have  not 
an  undoubting  perfuafion,  or  certain  evidence  in  their  confciences 
that  they  are  faints  in  heart.  If  this  were  neceffary,  no  doubting 
chriftian,  none  but  they  who  have  attained  to  the  aflurance  of 
hope  ought  to  come.  But  this  none  will  fay.  Certain  evidences 
of  fanclihcation  are  not  neceflary  by  the  confcnt  of  all.  Nor  can  it 
be  fald  that  fuch  evidences  are  neceflary  as  have  a  real  and  certain 
conne'5iion  with  a  ftate  of  grace,  though  it  may  not  be  necefTary 
t'lat  the  fubje,5l  know  this  connexion,  f'or  the  right  of  accefs 
is  not  grounded  on  any  thing  fecret  and  unknown  to  him  by 
whom  it  is  exercifed,  but  upon  known  and  fufHcicnt  reafons  and 
evidence  in  the  view  of  a  right  confcicnce.  But  an  unknown 
conneciion  of  evidences  v.ith  a  flate  of  grace  can  be  no  reafon  tor 
any  one  to  act  upon.  It  can  add  no  itrength  or  validity  to  his 
rigilt  or  warrant. 

Nor  do  I  tiiink  it  nccefiary  that  a  man  find  fuch  evidences  of 
faticlifying  grace  as  are  known  to  make  it  more  probable^  and  fo 
produce  a  prevailing  perfuafion  that  he  is  a  true  faint.  If  my 
jutiginj  it  to  be  moft  probable  that  1  am  a  true  faint  be  necclTary 
to  warrant  my  coming  into  the  church,  then  it  is  alfo  nccefiary 
th.U  I  have  a  rule,  and  proper  evidence  to  ground  this  judgment 
upon.  C)thcrv.ife  it  will  be  only  a  random  conjc^lure  or  prcfump- 
tion.  liut  I  find  no  rule,  no  marks  by  whicli  one  whofc  finccr- 
ity  is  doubtful  can  determine  upon  furc  grounds  whether  or  no 
it  be  z\\  the  \^hoIe  moQ  probable.     There  arc  rules  by  which  wt 

may 


7he  Right  of  Accefs  to  the  Prlvihges  of  External  Communion.    79 

may  try  ourfelves  whether  we  arc  true  chriftians.  And  if  com- 
paring ourfelves  with  thefe  we  are  in  doubt,  there  are  other  lefs 
certain  marks,  which,  if  we  find  in  ourfelves,  wc  may  hope  com- 
fortably, though  we  have  not  aflurance.  That  is,  If  we  are  not 
confcious  of  hypocrify  in  religion.  But  how  do  we  know  whether 
the  greater  part  of  thofe  whofe  hearts  condemn  them  not  of  hypo- 
crify, are  fmcere  chriftians  ?  How  can  a  doubting  chriftian  deter- 
mine whether  the  hopeful  but  uncertain  figns  of  grace  which  he 
finds  in  himfelf  (for  to  him  they  appear  uncertain  fo  long  as  he 
is  doubtful)  whether  thefe  be  oftner  than  not  connected  with  the 
reality  of  inward  fanciification  ?  Whether  the  greater  paripof  fuch 
dubious  characters  as  his  own  appears  to  himfelf,  may  not  be 
thofe  whofe  hearts  are  not  right  with  God  ?  And  confcquently 
whether  the  probability  preponderates  in  favour  of  iiimfclf,  or 
any  one  in  particular  ? 

A  profefiion  of  chriftianity  is  credible  evidence  to  the  church 
that  the  profefTor  is  a  chrillian,  though  it  is  not  known  wheth.er 
the  greater  part  of  profeiTors  be  fuch.  And  if  I  am  not  confcious 
of  hypocrify,  this  is  a  credible  evidence  in  my  own  confcience  that 
I  am  fincere.  But  as  I  know  not  whether  the  greateft  part  are 
fincere  chriftians,  who  are  unconfcious  of  iiypocrify,  how  can  I 
know  whether  this  amounts  to  a  preponderant  probability  ? 

We  have  reafon  to  think  that  fome,  we  know  not  how  many, 
are  infincere  in  the  profeffion  and  practice  of  religion  who  are  not 
confcious  of  it.  And  therefore  though  my  heart  reproaches  me 
not,  yet  I  cannot  fay  that  this  makes  it  moft  probable  on  the 
■whole  that  I  am  a  fincere  chriftian.  And  yet  if,  after  careful  ex- 
amination of  myfelf  by  the  word  of  God,  I  find  hopeful  marks 
of  fincerity,  not  invalidated  by  evidence  of  hypocrify,  I  find  more 
xt2.{ox\  in  myfelf  for  comfortable  hope,  than  felf  condemnation. 
This  I  call  credible  evidence  of  fan^if  cation  in  the  view  and  account 
•f  confcience.  And  this  J  think  all  who  coir.e  into  church  com- 
munion ought  to  have.  But  to  make  it  a  rule,  that  none  may 
come  but  thoje  who  judge  on  fufficient  grounds  that  it  is  on  the  ivhole 
?nofl  probable  they  are  true  faints  muft  leave  the  confciencts  of  all 
doubting  chriftians  in  inextricable  perplexity.* 

SECTION 

*  If  it  were  known  that  the  greater  part  of  the  money  of  a  particular 
ftamp  and  date  were  counterfeit,  it  would  then  be  more  probable  that  each 
untried  piece  in  particular  was  counterfeit.  If  it  were  only  known  in  <;ene- 
ral  that  much  of  it  was  counterfeit,but  whether  the  greater  part  or  not  was 
uncertain,  we  fhould  then  be  unable  to  determine  whether  any  uiitrjcl 
piece  were  moft  probably  counterfeiter  not.  But  if  it  were  enquired 
concerning  any  (uch  piece  whether  any  fpecial  figns  of  its  being  counter- 
feit appeared  in  it^  we  might  then  fay,  if  no  luch  (igns  ap))eared  in  it,  thar 
it  had  a  fair  appearance  of  being  good.  But  yet  as  perhaps  the  greater 
part  of  what  looked  as  well,  was  not  good,  we  could  not  fay  wlieth.cr  it 
were  moft  probable  that  this  pamicular  piece  were  good. 


l>o     The  Right  of  Acefs  to  the  Pnvllegfs  of  External  Communion^ 


SECTION    IL 


HIhU  Evidences  cf  SiUicllficatlon  give  a  Right  of  Accefs  to   Special 

Ordinances* 

IT  has  been  obfervcd  thnt  a  right  of  accefs  Is  a  right  or  war- 
rant to  aft.  That  this  ariles  from  a  good  rcalbn  in  the  view  of 
tJic  aecnr.  That  it  is  not  grace,  but  evidence  of  grace,  winch 
furniihcs  a  man  with  a  ^ood  reafon  for  coming.  That  certain 
evidence  is  not  necefTary.  Nor  fuch  evidence  as  is  known  to 
amount  to  a  preponderating  probabiHty  :  Dut  that  lower  evfd«icc 
is  fufiiciently  credible  to  fati^fy  a  right  confcience  that  it  is  mc^ 
reafonable  and  fafe  to  come  than  to  refrain  :  And  that  it  is  cer- 
tainly our  duty  and  right  to  a6l  the  more  reafonable  part  in  all 
cafes.  We  are  now  to  enquire  what  are  thofe  credible  evidences 
of  fanjlification  which  render  it  warrantable  for  one  to  come  into 
communion,  with  an  inftituted  church. 

As  vilible  faintOiip  exhibited  to  the  church  in  a  credible  pro- 
f^lfion  of  cliriflianity  gives  a  right  of  admiffion,  fo  vifible  faint- 
Ihip  in  the  view  of  conlcience,  or  a  confcioufnefs  of  affent  and 
confent  to  the  chriiVian  religion,  io  far  as  we  underftand  it,  and 
know  our  own  hearts,  gives  a  right  of  accefs.  Indeed,  if  wc 
fpeak  properly,  whatfocver  is  vifiblc  is  real  and  certain.  Butit 
is  not  fuch  avifibility  of  inward  fanv^itication  as  begets  afTurance, 
whicli  is  required  in  this  c:x[ii.  For  though  the  affurance  ot  hope 
be  attainable,  yet  none  will  fay  it  is  necefiary  to  our  having  a  right 
of  accefs.  But  they  who  have  credible,  though  uncertain  evi- 
dence of  fanc'^ifying  grace,  may  warrantably  comc^. 

And  ns  thofe  \^\\o  glv:  evidence  9^  moral  llncerity  or  veracity  in 
profefhns  chri/lianiry  have  a  right  of  admilfion,  fo  they  who  are 
eoiifclous  that  they  can  {o  profcfs,  their  hearts  not  condemning 
them  of  hypocrify,  may  warrantably  profcfs  accordingly,  and  aftc 
cdmiffion.  But  they  who  cannot  profcfs  in  mor:d  finccrity,  as 
before  explained,  have  no  right  or  warrant  to  profcfs  clirirtianity, 
^\\<\  fo  mulibe  bsrrod  from  rightful  communion  with  the  ciiurch. 
l*'or  known  falfliood  and  prevarication  in  profcthng  religion  is  im- 
pious prefumption. 

Hence  it  appears,  tint  all  wlio  know  tliemfclvcs  to  be  uncon- 
verted have  no  right  of  nccefs.  Such  arc  not  vifible  faints  in  the 
view  of  their  own  confcience.  They  find  not  credible  evidence 
of  fanJlifyinjT  grace,  but  know  themfelves  to  be  crscclcfs.  '1  hey 
cannot  profcfs  cluilVianity  in  moral  (^ncerity  ;  but  muft  be  con- 

fcious 


The  Right  of  Acccfs  to  the  Privileges  of  External  Communion,     it 

fclous  that  they  do  not  heartily  alTent  and  confent  to  it.  For 
though  moral  fincerity,  in  the  profefTion  and  pradice  of  the 
chriftian  religion,  is  not  a  certain  evidence  of  inward  fanf^ifica- 
tion,  yet  it  is  fuch  a  credible  pofitive  evidence  of  it,  that  whoever 
finds  it  in  himfelf  cannot  know  himfelf  to  be  unconverted,  un- 
lefs  by  fupernatural  revelation.  It  would  be  inconfillent  to  fup- 
pofe  that  one  who  knows  himfelf  to  be  an  unbeliever,  and  dif- 
obedient  in  heart  and  life  to  the  gofpel,  fhould  at  the  fame  time 
be  confcious  that  he  does  really  believo  and  confent  to  it  without 
referve,  fo  far  as  he  knows  himfelf.  He  who  is  confcious  of  this 
has  reafon  to  hope,  though  he  may  not  be  certain  that  he  is  fin- 
cere.  He  may  fufpect  himfelf  noiwirhflanding,  and  even  think 
it  more  probable  thai  his  heart  is  not  perfed  before  God.  This 
has  probably  often  been  the  cafe  of  true  chrirtians.  But  how 
Qhe  who  can  profefs  in  moral  fmcerity  Ihould  know  himfelf  to 
4)e  infiiccre,  is  to  me  as  inconceivable,  as  for  one  to  know  that 
he  fpeaks  falHy,  when  he  is  aiming  to  fpeak  truly. 

I  conceive  then,  that  all  thofe  may  warrantably  and  rightfully 
come  into  church  communion  who  are  vifible  faints  in  the  view 
of  their  own  confcience,  as  before  explained.  That  is,  all  who 
find  that,  fo  far  as  they  underftand  the  gofpel,  and  know  their 
own  minds  and  hearts,  they  do  believe,  approve  and  confent  to  it 
without  referve,  and  are  willing  to  give  up  themfelves  to  God  in 
Chrift  according  to  the  terms  of  the  new  covenant,  refolving 
without  delay  to  forfake  every  known  un,  and  perfevere  in  the 
practice  of  every  known  duty.  Thefehave  fuch  hopeful  evidence 
of  chriftian  piety  in  themfelves,  that  they  have  reafon  to  think  it 
is  their  right  and  duty  to  join  themfelves  to  an  inflituted  church. 

If  the  church  is  bound  to  judge  one  to  be  a  vifible  faint,  and 
receive  him  as  one  who  exhibits  credible  evidence  of  true  piety, 
when  he  makes  a  found,  intelligent  and  honefi  profeflion  of  chrii- 
tianity,  fo  far  as  they  can  judge,  and  is  not  fcandalous  in  his  life  : 
then  he  who  finds  not  but  that  he  does  fincercly  believe,  approve 
and  confent  to  the  gofpel,  {o  far  as  he  underftands  it,  and  is  not 
confcious  of  indulging  himfelf  in  known  wickednefs,  fuch  a  one 
(whatever  he  may  think  of  his  ftate,  and  whatever  it  may  be 
fuppofed  to  be)  is  a  vifible  faint  in  the  eye  of  his  own  confcience. 
He  has  credible  evidence  of  grace  in  himfelf,  whether  he  have 
the  truth  of  it  or  not ;  and  may  as  reafonably  have  charity  for 
himfelf,  (if  the  exprcITion  may  be  allowed)  and  come  for  the 
privileges  of  a  rightful  church  member,  as  the  church  may  have 
charity  for  him,  and  admit  him. 

Some  may  perhaps  think  it  too  (lender  evidence  in  favour  of  a 
profollbr,  that  he  is  morally  fincerej  that  his  heart  condemns  him 
not  of  infincerity  in  the  profefTion  and  practice  of  chriftianity.    I 
L  giant 


§2     !}>{  Right  of  Accrfs  to  the  Privileges  of  External  CommunUnl 

grant  it  is  not  a  certain  evidence  of  grace,  nor  is  this  neceffary  te 
give  a  right  of  acceis,  as  all  allow.  Hut  it  is  not  a  contemptible 
ground  of  hope.  If  our  hearts  condemn  us  not,  then  have  \\e 
cofjliilcnce  tovvards  God.  Ainny  wh.o  profefs  godly  (incerity, 
iiave  really  no  more  certain  evidence  of  it  than  tliis,  that  they  are 
not  confcjous  of  hypocrify  in  prcfeirmg  and  pradiifjng  chriftiauity. 
They  who  have  this  evidence  in  their  favour,  however  they  may 
fufpcct  tl>emfclves,  have  reafon  to  hope  they  are  fmcere.  But 
they  have  a  good  reafon,  warrant,  right  to  take  upon  them  the 
chrillian  profcfTion,  if  they  can  do  it  without  known  hypocrify. 

For  will  any  fay  a  man  cannot  have  reafonable  fatisfatStion 
tliat  he  is  warranted  to  confefs  Chrift  before  men,  join  v.ith  his 
profelTed  dilciples,  and  declare  himfelf  on  their  fide,  by  worfliip- 
ing  with  them  in  the  ufe  of  gofpel  ordinances,  till  his  faith  has 
been  proved  to  be  genuine?  is  there  any  rule  or  example  in  the 
New  Tertament  from  which  fuch  a  conclufion  can  be  gathered  ? 
I  think  not. 

'I'he  A potlles  received  thofe  into  the  church  without  delay  who 
profefTed  to  believe  that  Jcfus  was  the  Clirill  the  Son  of  God, 
tnc  Saviour  and  Lord  of  men.  It  appears  not  that  they  waited 
to  have  tlieir  faith  proved  by  works  or  trials,  cither  to  the  church 
cr  to  their  own  confciences.  A  bare  profelfion  of  faith  fatisfied 
the  Apoflles  that  they  were  fit  to  be  admitted.  And  the  con- 
viv-Hion  the  hearers  had  of  the  truth  of  the  Apollles'  docftrine  fat- 
isli'jd  tiiem  of  their  right  and  duty  to  profefs  this  belief,  and  join 
with  others  who  protelled  the  fame.  What  confidence  they  had 
that  their  faith  was  of  fuch  a  kind  as  would  not  fail,  but  be  found 
upon  trial,  to  praife,  honour  and  glory,  appears  not ;  nor  wheth- 
er any  of  them  were  fully  pcrfuacied  of  their  own  godly  fincerity 
before  they  joined  to  the  church.  After  they  were  admitted, 
they  were  exhorted  to  make  their  calling  and  eledion  fure,  2nd  at- 
t:iin  to  the  alfuranee  of  iiope,  by  their  diligence  in  works  and 
Jabours  of  love,  and  in  the  duties  of  their  heavenly  calling.  The 
Apoftles  tnught  that  it  is  by  keeping  Clirill's  commandments 
we  know  that  we  know  him.  And  they  exhort  thofe  to  examine 
themfelvcs  whether  thev  were  in  the  fjith,  whofe  right  of  mem- 
berlhip  they  did  nor  call  in  quell  ion. 

As  there  is  no  gofpel  rule  requiring  a  churcli  not  to  admit  a 
profeflbr,  unlefs  tl-.cy  were  fure,  or  perluaded  that  he  is  a  tiue 
fiint,  (though  indcrd  they  ought  charitably  to  repute  e\cry  crcd- 
jnle  profefibr  to  be  fincere)  lo. there  is  no  rule  forbidding  a  Iieaier 
to  come  into  the  chuich,  unlefs  he  be  well  perfuaded  that  he  is 
a  true  Mint.  Nor  can  this,  1  think,  be  argued  from  any  tl;in2; 
in  the  Now  Tefiament.  We  find  not  that  (Jhril\  or  ihc  ApolUes 
iciulcd  any  who  defircJ  to  profcfi  their  faith.,  and  join  thciiilelves 

to 


^he  Right  ofAcceJi  to  the  Privileges  of  External  Communion  ^     S3 

to  the  difciples,  though  he  knew,  and  they  were  doubtlcfs  ap- 
prehenfive  that  many  were  not  difciples  indeed.  Nor  do  we  find 
that  they  ever  cautioned  them  not  to  prefume  to  come,  till  they 
had  good  fatisfa6tion  touching  their  fpiritual  ftate ;  or  that  they 
reproved  any  as  rarti  and  too  forward  in  offering  themfelves  be- 
fore they  had  fu. Sclent  evidence  that  their  converfion  was  found 
and  faving.  This  feems  very  remarkable,  when  it  is  confidercd 
how  fuddenly,  and  in  what  numbers  they  flocked  into  the  church, 
fometimes  thoufands  in  a  day. 

It  may  be  thought  that  thefe  primitive  profeffors  v;ere  affured, 
or  at  leaf}  perfuaded,  that  they  were  in  a  i^ate  of  favour  with 
God  :  "  For  upon  their  embracing  the  gofpel,  they  were  filled 
with  joy  and  praifed  God.  That  the  account  of  them  now  is 
not  as  of  perfons  under  awakening,  pricked  in  their  heart,  weary 
and  heavy  laden  finners,  but  of  perfons  whofe  forrow  was  turned 
into  joy,  looking  on  themfelves  as  now  in  a  good  elTate."  I  an- 
fwer — Since  they  had  profelTed  their  faith  to  the  fatisfadion  of  the 
Apofiles,  and  were  admitted  to  baptifm  by  them,  this  mufi  be 
matter  of  much  comfort  and  joy  to  them,  though  rh.ey  might 
ftill  have  doubts  whether  their  hearts  were  fincere.  Beiides,  we 
need  not  imagine  that  their  joy  and  praifes  arofe  only,  or  chiefly 
from  a  perfuafion  and  fenfe  of  being  the  favourites  of  God^  and 
in  a  good  eftate.  Is  not  the  gofiDcl  glad  tidings  of  gre.at  joy  to 
thofe  who  are  pained  with  a  fenfe  of  lin,  guilt  and  the  wrath  of 
God  ?  Muft  it  not  rejoice  fuch,  before  they  are  fatisfied  wliether 
their  fins  are  forgiven,  to  hear  and  believe  that  there  is  forgive- 
nefs  with  God  :  That  he  delights  in  mercy  :  That  Ciirifi:  came 
into  the  world  to  fave  finners,  and  there  is  falvation  in  him  :  That 
hope  is  fet  before  them,  to  which  they  may  fly  for  refuge,  and 
efcape  the  vvTath  to  come,  and  be  the  happy  fubjccfs  of  that  grace 
•which  bringeth  falvation  ?  I  might  further  aik,  Would  it  not 
fill  a  benevolent  heart  with  joy  to  know  that  many  have  been, 
and  will  be  faved  from  fin  and  mifcry,  and  blefied  with  all  fpirit- 
ual blefiings  in  Chrifi  ?  And  is  it  no  matter  of  joy  and  praife  to 
a  chrifi:ian  to  behold  the  glory  of  God's  grace  as  difplayed  in  the 
gofpel  ?  We  need  not  imagine  that  thofe  primitive  chriftians  were 
fo  felfifh  as  not  to  be  abJe  to  find  any  thing  in  the  gofpel  to  ex- 
cite their  joy  and  praifes,  till  they  were  firfl:  fatisfied  that  them- 
felves  were  objeils  of  divine  favour,  and  in  a  fafe  and  happy 
fiate. 

To  proceed.  They  who  mofi:  infill  that  fanvSlifylng  grace  is 
necefiary  to  qualify  for  a  rightful  accefs  to  fpecial  ordinances,  yet 
grant  that  they  w^\\o  upon  examination,  find  reafon  to  hope  they 
are  fincere,  are  bound  in  confcience  to  come,  though  they  may 
have  many  doubts.  And  rliat  they  who  find  that  they  truly  be- 
lieve 


§4     ^'?  Right  of  Accefi  to  the  Privihgns  of  External  Communion. 

lievc  and  confent  to  the  gofpe),  fo  far  as  they  know  themfelvcs, 
have  rcafon  to  hope  they  are  lincere. 

Now,  they  who  are  morally  linccre  in  profeflfing  chrlfllanity, 
Iiave  all  this  evidence  that  they  are  real  chriftians  :  Ir  or  moral  fin- 
cerity  is  oppofed  to  confcious  hypocrify.  \{  luch  have  not  a  v^ ar- 
rant to  come,  how  can  any  come  wiih  a  good  ccnfcicnce,  vho 
duubt  their  o\An  finceriry  and  fpiritual  llate  ? 

Will  any  deny  that  one,  Vvho  after  ferious  examination  of  him- 
felf,  is  uncertain  whether  he  be  a  true  faint,  may  yet  be  certain 
that  he  finds  hopeful  evidence  of  fincerity  in  himfclf?  Or,  that 
one  who  is  not  confcious  of  hypocrify  in  the  profcflion  and  prac- 
tice of  the  chriftian  religion,  finds  more  reafon  in  }jm)eif  xo  hope 
he  is  lincere,  than  to  think  he  is  a  hypocrite,  however  lie  may  Ice 
caufe  to  fufpecl  himfclf,  from  the  inclinations  to  fin  he  finds  in 
himfclf,  from  the  falling  away  of  fo  many  en^incnt  profeflcrs, 
and  other  grounds  of  fear  which  he  fees  in  himfclf  and  otiiers. 

Now,  may  not  fuch  a  perfon,  notwithflandmg  his  doubts,  have 
reafon  to  think,  yea  to  have  an  undouhi'wg  fcrjuafior^  tliat  the  in- 
ducements and  encouragements  he  has  to  join  himlelf  to  a  chrif- 
tian  church  are  greater,  than  any  difcouragements  arifing  from 
the  fcruple  before  mentioned  ?  May  we  not  fafely  determine  that 
he  wlioie  conl-icnce  hears  him  wiinefs  that  he  can  fincerely,  fo 
far  as  he  knows  himfclf,  profefs  all  tliat  is  required  to  be  profeffed 
by  thofc  who  are  admitted  to  communion,  has  unqueilionably 
more  and  better  reafon  to  come  forward,  and  give  h.onor  to  Chrift 
and  his  gofpel  by  fuch  a  profeffion,  than  to  retrain  till  lie  has  cer- 
tain evidence  that  he  is  a  true  faint,  or  at  Icart  is  fure  that  this  is 
on  the  whole  mofl  probable  ;  which  1  think  no  doubting  chrift- 
ian,  will  ever  be  able  to  determine?  And  if,  as  1  conceive,  fuch 
a  perfon  may  have  clear  and  undoubted  evidence  and  convidior^ 
in  his  own  confciencc  that  the  reafons  perfuading  him  that  he 
may  and  ought  to  offer  himfelf  for  admiflion  are  of  more  weight 
tlian  the  fcruplcs  wliich  tend  to  difcoura^e  him,  I  v\ould  afk,  Js  it 
not  evidently  moft  rcafonablc,  that  a  weightier  and  better  reafon 
fliould  determine  his  conduvft,  ratlier  than  a  weaker  doubt  or 
fcruple  on  thiC  other  hand  ?  And  if  this  be  granted,  vhich  1  think 
all  mufl  grant,  I  would  afk  again,  Is  it  not  undoubtcdlv  tiie  right 
nd  duty  of  fuch  a  man,  and  of  every  man,  to  a(!:t  rationally  ;  and 
practically  to  prefer  a  llronger  and  better  reafon  to  a  weaker  one 
to  the  contrary  ?  Whether  the  better  reafon,  in  this  cafe,  doe$ 
not  lay  a  facicd  obligation  upon  a  man  to  determine  his  condu6l 
according  to  it  ?  Whether  it  ought  not  to  weigh  dov^n  what  is 
evidently  of  lefs  weight  ?  and  though  it  may  leave  the  fpecula- 
tivejudgment  in  doubt  as  to  his  Ipiritual  llatc,  \et  it  directs  ilie 
confcicncs  rightly  and  certainly  to  ikt(n.Ku:c  wlvdt   we  reafonably 


The  Right  of  Accefs  to  the  Privileges  cf  External  Commumon.     S^ 

may  and  ought  to  do  in  fuch  a  doubtful  cafe  >  That  i«,  to  deier. 
mine  certainly  and  rightly^  what  is  our  duty  and  right  to  do.  In  a 
word,  Is  not  a  manifeft  preponderancy  oi  reajon  and  evidence,  on 
one  fide  of  the  queftion,  a  fvfficient  warrant  for  us  to  act  upon  ? 
If  fo,  then  they  who  have  more  and  weightier  reafon  for  coming  into 
church  coinmunion  than  refraining  have  a  good  warrant  and 
lawful  right  to  do  fo.  If  not,  then  none  hsve  a  fufTicient  reafon, 
or  arc  allowed  to  come,  but  thofe  who  have  full  alfurance  of  their 
own  good  eftate.  For,  as  was  argued  before,  not  inevident 
qualitications,  however  real,  but  evident  and  fuiTicient  reafons  in 
the  view  of  our  minds  give  us  our  right  and  warrant  to  act  in  all 
cafes. 

Since  then  inevident  fan£lification  is  no  reafon  or  warrant  to 
ac^  upon,  and  io  can  give  no  right  of  accefs  to  fpecial  ordinances; 
fmce  it  is  fufficient  reafon  and  evidence  in  the  view  of  the  mind 
which  gives  this  right  ;  fmce  certain  evidence  of  inwsrd  fancPiifi- 
cation  is  not  neceffary,  but  credible  though  fallible  evidence  is 
fufficient  by  the  confent  of  all  ;  fince  the  practice  of  the  Apofiles 
in  admitting  profelTors  into  the  church,  without  waiting  to  have 
them  prove  the  truth  of  their  faith  to  the  church,  and  to  their 
own  confcience  fliews  that,  this  proof  is  not  neceflary  to  givecne 
a  right  of  admiffion  and  accefs,  we  mufi:  conclude  that  as  a  Jound 
profefFion  of  the  chriilian  religion  exhibited  apparently  in  veracity 
or  moral  fmcerity  makes  a  man  a  vifible  faint  in  the  account  of 
the  church,  and  gives  him  a  right  of  admiffion  ;  {o  confcious  ve- 
racity or  moral  fincerity  in  afienting  and  confenting  to  the  chrif- 
tian  religion,  makes  him  a  vifible  faint  in  the  view  of  confcience, 
and  gives  him  a  warrant  or  right  of  accefs. 

It  may  be  faid,  that  if  one  judges  his  fpiritual  ftate  to  be  better 
than  it  is,  he  deceives  himfelf  ;  which  he  has  no  right  to  do  ; 
and  his  error  gives  him  no  right  to  privileges.  1  anfwer,  If  he 
proceeds  according  to  the  rule  and  evidence  by  which  he  ought 
to  jud2;c  in  the  cafe,  he  has  judged  rightly  and  regularly,  whether 
he  has  judged  truly  or  not.  Nor  is  it  contrary  to  trutli  for  one 
to  judge  that  he  has  thofe  marks  of  fan6^itication  of  which  he  is 
confcious,  though  he  cannot  conclude  pofitively,  from  uncertain 
credibility  or  probability  what  his  flate  is.  But  a  pofitive  con* 
clufioa  that  our  (late  is  good  appears  not  to  be  neccflary  in  this  cafe. 


SECTION 


S6     7hi  R'ght  of  Accefi  to  the  Privileges  tf  External  CommuniofC 

SECTION    III. 

Thuhting  Clmjltam    may  have  a  fure  Warrayit  or  Right  of  Acccfs, 

FROM  the  preccedlng  difcourfe  It  appears  that  a  man  who 
doubts  whether  the  command  of  Chrift  requiring  his  difciples  to 
attend  the  fpecial  ordinances  of  the  gofpel  fpeaks  directly  to  any 
but  to  true  chrilllans,  and  whether  any  but  fcch  have  a  covenant 
grant  of,  or  title  to  them,  and  alio  whether  himfclf  be  a  fmcerc 
chriftian,  may  notwithftanding  thefe  fpcculative  doubts,  be  fure 
that  it  is  his  duty  and  his  right  to  come  into  church  com- 
munion. For  whether  a  command  be  directly  addrefied  to  us  or 
po,  yet  if  we  have  plainly  more  reafon  to  judge  that  it  fpeaks  to 
us,  this  is  fufficient  to  bind  us  in  duty  to  yield  obedience  to  it. 
And  whether  we  are  really  entitlcdhy  a  covenant  grant  to  a  privi- 
lege or  not,  yet  if  we  have  credible  evidence  that  we  are  rightful 
fuhjeds,  this  gives  us  a  warrant,  a  lawful  and  certain  right,  to  make 
ufe  of  it.  Uncertain  titles  give  certain  warrants  till  they  are  found 
to  he  null  and  void.  We  are  often  uncertain  whether  the  title  by 
which  we  hold  our  property  be  valid.  Whether  the  relations 
mankind  arc  prefumed  to  fland  in  one  to  another  arc  really  fuch 
as  we  take  them  to  be.  Indcetl  we  feem  to  be  for  the  moft  part  in 
a  degree  uncertain  with  refpecl  to  the  real  cxiflence  of  thofc  fads 
and  circumjlances,  on  the  fuppofition  of  which  our  rights  and 
duties  arc  founded.  Yet  our  rights  and  duties  are  certain  and 
imqueftionable,  fo  long  as  we  have  credible  evidence  of  the  truth 
of  thefe  circumftances  ami  fads. 

We  may  alfo  from  what  has  been  argued  above  fee  that  who- 
ever comes  to  fpecial  ordinances  mufl  have  a  kncvjn  or  evident 
ri^i^hl  in  order  to  his  doing  it,  with  a  good  confcience.  If  by  a 
riLdit  we  mean  what  I  call  a  pajjive  right  or  s  ccjcuant  title  xo  crdl- 
ninces  in  the  outward  admiuiltrition  and  inward  efficacy  of  ihcm, 
tiicn  I  conceive  that  one  who  is  ?iot  certain^  nor  fully  pcrfuadcd  of 
this  oiay  not  only  have  a  ri^ht  to  them,  but  alfo  a  ivarraut  a  fujp- 
clcKt  reafon  to  come  to,  and  attend  upon  tliC  outward  ndminiltra- 
tjon  of  them.  I'or  whoever  has  credible  evidence  in  his  own  mind, 
tlKit  thefe  ordinances  arc  by  the  gofpel  covenant  granted  to  and 
enjoined  upon  him,  is  bouiul  in  duly  and  has  a  good  reafon  and 
warrant  for  coming  to  them,  notwithllanding  he  may  not  be 
certain  whether  he  has  a  covenant  title, 

Hut  if  by  a  right  to  ordinances  wc  mean,  what  I  call  an  aSlive 
ylrht.  That  \s,  a  good  wa-rant,  a  ftrfflcient  reafcn  for  coming  to, 
and  attending  upon  them,  then  nu  cue  may  or  can  with  a  good 

conkicncw 


^he  Right  of  Accefi  to  tie  Privileges  of  External  Commumcn,  87 

confcience  come  till  he  is  fatisfied  beyond  doubt  that  it  is  more 
reafonable  for  him  to  come  than  not,  and  confequently  that  he 
has  a  warrant  to  come.  Cafuifts,  agree  that  it  is  unlawful  for  a  man 
to  do  that,  the  lawfulnefs  of  doing  which  he  doubts.  I'his  rule 
is  grounded  on  the  words  of  the  Apoftle  in  Rom.  xiv.  Let  eve- 
ry man  be  fully  perfuaded  in  his  own  mind.  To  him  who 
cfteemeth  any  thing  unclean  to  him  it  is  unclean.  He  that  doubt- 
cth  is  condemned  if  he  eateth,  becaufe  he  eateth  not  of  faith  ;  for 
whatfoever  is  not  of  faith  is  fin.  This  is  not  to  be  underftood 
as  if  the  Apoftle  declared  it  to  be  unlawful  for  one  to  a6l  upon 
probable  evidences  and  reafons,  which  rriight  leave  the  fpeculative 
judgment  in  doubt  as  to  the  truth  of  facts.  For  it  is  often  our 
duty  to  a6t  upon  very  uncertain  and  flender  prefumptions.  But 
we  are  not  allowed  to  do  that  which  we  doubt  whether  it  be  law- 
ful, and  reafonable,  and  warrantable  for  us  to  do  when  all  things 
are  confidered.  We  mufl  have  a  reafon  in  the  view  of  our  minds 
for  acting  as  we  do  :  And  this  reafon  muft  be  evidently  better,and 
of  more  weight  than  any  reafons  we  have  to  the  contrary.  And 
if  the  reafons  for  doing  any  thing  evidently  preponderate,  they  give 
an  evident  or  known  warrant  or  right  to  do  it  in  the  judgment  of 
reafon  and  a  right  confcience.  Till  this  appears  a  right  con- 
fcience cajinot  lign  the  warpant.  And  without  the  leave  or  con- 
fent  of  our  own  confcience,  we  are  not  allowed  and  have  no  right 
to  do  any  thing. 

Ohje£l.  I.  But  it  may  be  obje£^ed  that  it  is  unreafonable  to  fay 
that  a  man  may  not  take  any  privilege  'till  he  knows  he  has  a 
right  to  take  it.  For  then  we  muft  do  nothing  upon  a  probable 
judgment  and  hope.  V/e  muft  neither  move,  nor  voluntarily 
forbear  to  move,  without  a  certainty  of  our  duty  in  the  cafe  one 
y/ay  or  other.  There  are  many  doubtful  cafes,  in  which  a  man 
muft  a6t  according  to  the  beft  of  his  judgment.  If  he  judges  ac- 
cording to  the  beft  light  he  can  obtain  that  it  is  his  right  and  duty 
to  come  into  church  communion,  he  maybe  bound  in  confcience 
to  do  fo,  notwiihftanding  he  may  doubt  of  his  right,  and  by  do- 
ing otherwife  he  would  avSl:  unreaionably,  and  run  himfelf  into 
what  he  thinks  the  greater  danger. 

I  anfwer. — If  it  be  unrcafonabie  to  fay  that  a  man  may  not  take 
any  privilege  till  he  knows  he  has  a  right  to  take  it,  then  the  con- 
tradicftory  pofition  is  reafonable.  That  a  man  may  take  a  privi- 
lege when  he  knows  not  that  he  has  a  right  to  take  it.  That  is, 
he  may  do  it  lawfully.  In  plain  Vv'ords.  Ke  has  an  evident  ri^ht 
to  do  what  he  has  no  knovv'n  right  to  do.  Which  Js,T  think, 
a  contradiction.  \{  we  are  often  obliged  to  aci:  upon  doubtful 
evidence  (as  it  is  certain  we  are)  then  we  have  a  right  to  act  on 
«loubtful  evidence.     For  neceffity  gives  us  a  right,  nay  obliges  us 

to 


88     Ihe  Rijhi  of  Acccfs  to  the  PrivlUga  of  External  Communion^ 

to  do  what  muil  be  done.  And  if  it  be  evidently  rcafonable  in 
fucii  Cafes  to  a^t  according  to  our  beft  judgment,  and  to  be  deter- 
mined by  tliolc  rcnfons,  and  that  evidence  which  is  of  mcft  weight ; 
then  wc  have  a  right,  and  ought  thus  to  aiSl  and  be  determined, 
ijo  that  the  evidence  of  our  right  to  do  any  thing  is  infeparably 
connecled^  and  keeps  pace  with  the  evidence  we  havctl^at  itisnc- 
ceflary  and  reafonable  for  us  to  do  it.  And  it  no  one  may  come 
to  ordinances  while  he  doubts  whctJicr  it  be  mof  recfonath^  for 
him  to  come,  then  he  may  not  come  while  he  doubts  whether  it 
be  his  r'i^ht  to  come. 

And  here  it  again  falls  in  our  way  to  obferve,  that  it  is  not 
fan^^ifying  grace  whicli  gives  a  right  or  warrant  to  come  into 
church  communion.  For  fmce  none  may  come  but  thofe  who 
^xz  fully  per  [lidded  \\\zX\X\%  mofr  reafonablc,  and  confequcnrly  their 
duty  arid  right  to  come,  wliich  implies  a  full  pcrfuafion,  that  they 
are  poflofied  of  tliat  which  gives  them  this  their  warrant ;  and 
lincc  fonie  who  arc  not  fully  pcrfuaded  that  they  are  the  fubjec^s  of 
linctifying  grace  have  confellediy  a  right  of  accefs  ;  it  tollows 
tint  fuch  have  more  certainty  of  their  right  of  accefs,  than  of  their 
being  true  faints,  which  could  not  be,  if  it  be  fuppofed  that  fanc- 
tif)in2  grace  gave  them  their  whole  right. 

Ohje:i,  2.  If  no  one  may  come  to  ordinances  while  he  doubts 
whether  it  be  his  right  or  duty  to  come.  An  unconverted 
man  nny  not  come,  if  he  has  any  doubt  of  the  riglu  of  the  un- 
converted.    1  anfvver. 

If  it  were  fuppofed  that  the  unconverted  might  have  a  right  of 
acccfi  to  fpecial  ordinances,  it  is  eafy  to  fee  that  fuch  may  be  fure 
of  their  oA'n  right,  without  knowing  whether  the  unconverted 
have  a  right  to  the  fame  privilege,  if  any  one  tinds  that  he  can 
proLfi  the  chridian  religion  without  known  hypocrify,  and  con- 
fequcnrly that  he  has  preponderating  reafons  and  encouragements 
to  UiC  the  ordinances,  he  may  be  lure  it  is  his  duty  and  right  to 
come  to  ihem.  Hut  thougli  tlus  i'^  fuincienc  to  afcertain  to  him  his 
own  right  and  uanant,  it  mufi  ftill  leave  liim  in  doubt  whether 
any  unconverted  have  the  fa;ne  right  unlcfs  he  could  know  wheth- 
er any  fuch  had  as  fufiicient  realbns  for  coming  as  he  linds  in 
himfeif.  Hut  as  he  knows  not  that  he  is  unconverted,  his  own 
v.irrarit,  however  certain,  will  not  enable  him  to  conclude 
politively  and  ccrrainly  tint  any  unconverted  have  a  like  warrant  j 
though  he  mull  in  reafon  concIu;!e,  that  if  any  fuch  liave  crrili- 
ble  evidence  in  their  own  confcience  that  thev  are  fmcere  clirif- 
tian?,  nnd  that  it  is  mofl  reafonable  for  them  to  fcek  admiHion  to 
:he  privileges  of  llie  cliurch,  then  it  is  their  right  and  duty  to  do 
io.  For  every  one  may  arul  ought  to  do  what  is  mort  reafonable, 
mi  La*  bwa  f^;d.  Lu:  no  one  wko  is  ful'.y  pcifuadcd  that//;r^r/ 
.,  (hri/iians 


7he  Right  of  Acccfi  to  the  Privileges  of  External  Communion.     89 

chrijlians  only  have  a  right  or  warrant  to  communicate  witii  the 
church  in  fpecial  ordinances,  can  warrantably  come  to  them  or 
attend  upon  them  in  faith  and  a  good  confcience,  while  he  doubts 
his  own  fincerity.  He  may  not  come,  unlefs  he  is  on  good 
grounds  perfuacied  beyond  all  doubt  that  he  is  a  finccve  chrifiian. 

Oh].  3.  If  all  who  come  to  ordinances  murt  have  an  undoubt- 
ing  perfuafion  of  their  right  or  warrant  to  come,  the  unconverted 
are  efteftually  barred  by  this  rule.  For  fince  they  have  not  an 
undoubting  perfuafion  of  the  truth  of  the  gofpel,  and  fo  know 
not  whether  the  charter  be  authentic  in  which  alone  the  right  of 
any  to  chri^ian  privileges  is  conveyed,  they  cannot  have  an  un- 
doubting perfuafion  of  tiieir  own  right.     I  anfwer — 

That  no  unfandified  pcrfon  is  fully  perfuaded  of  the  truth  of 
the  gofpel,  is  more  than  1  have  ever  feen  proved.  If  the  devils 
have  a  full  conviflion  of  this,  I  fee  not  why  unfand^ified  men 
fliould  be  thought  incapable  of  it.  But  not  to  infifl:  upon  this — 
I  fay.  It  is  a  great  miftaks  to  imagine  that  the  fcriptures  lay  no 
certain  obligations,  and  convey  no  certain  rights  to  thofe  who  are 
not  aflured  of  the  truth  and  divine  authority  of  them.  For  if  it 
appears  probable,  or  credible  that  the  gofpel  is  a  divine  revelation, 
this  is  enough  to  faften  facrcd  and  important  obligations  on  the 
confcience  ;  obligations  as  certain  and  unqucftionable  as  any 
which  can  arife  from  the  moft  affured  conviction  of  its  truth.  If 
the  gofpel  is  believed  to  be  moft  probably  a  divine  revelation,  then 
it  is  mojl  certainly  the  duty  and  right  of  all  who  are  thus  perfuad- 
ed ferioufly  to  obferve  its  rules  and  precepts. 

If  I  judge  it  probable  that  the  gofpel  is  divine,  and  if  I  find  that 
it  calls  upon  all  to  attend  to  its  propofals  upon  their  peril,  am  I 
not  undoubtedly  bound  in  duty  to  hear  the  word  ?  And  have  I 
not  a  certain,  unqueftionable,  known  right  to  do  fo  ?  Are  any 
duties  and  warrants  more  certain  and  unqueftionable  than  many 
which  are  grounded  only  on  moral  and  probable  evidence  \  Can 
I  not  he  certain  that  I  have  a  right  to  ufe  a  privilege  which  the 
law  of  my  country  gives  me,  unlels  I  have  not  only  moral,  but 
infallible  evidence  that  my  title  is  good,  and  the  law  valid. 

We  have  no  more  than  moral  and  probable  evidence  of  the 
authenticity  of  human  laws,  or  conftitutions ;  but  is  it  therefore 
uncertain  whether  it  be  our  duty  or  right  to.  obey  them,  or  take 
the  benefit  of  their  proteiuon  ?  Is  it  uncertain  whether  a  man  has 
a  right  to  claim  or  receive  a  legacy  bequeathed  to  him,  becaufe 
wills  are  proveable  only  by  moral  and  fallible  evidence  ?  Is  it  not 
certain  that  a  credible,  prefumptive  title,  nay,  mere  profelFion  of 
a  privilege  bona  fide  gives  a  right  to  make  ufe  of  it,  in  fuch  ways 
as  are  not  injurious  to  others.  In  (Iiort,  if  it  be  p»-obable  that  a 
law  is  authentic,  the  fubj-dt  who  thinks  fo,  is  certainly  bound  to 
M  pbey 


90         lis  Right  :fthe  VnconmrUd  to  External  Communion. 

obey  ir.  If  1  have  rcafon  to  think  it  moft  probable  tliat  I  have  a 
title  to  any  privilege,  1  h^ve  rcafon  to  be  certain  that  I  have  a 
rieht  to  take  and  iifc  it,  till  tjic  contrary  fhall  ap^;car,  efpccially 
when  thii  i^  a  matter  of  duty  as  vncU  as  ri^hr. 


— »>^»->->^^'-<?^^gfK^-<^««''  -  ■ 


CHAP.      VI. 

Of  the  RIGHT  e/' z/'^' UNCONVERTED /^  EXTERNAL 
COMMUNION. 


SECTION    I. 

Reafons  in  favour  of  the  Affirmative, 

BY  the  foregoing  rules  and  maxim?,  we  may  nov^r  modeftly 
examine  that  much  difputed  qucftion,  whether  an  uncon- 
verted man  may  have  a  right  to  be  a  member  of  an  inltituted 
church,  and"  ulc  the  privileges  of  a  member  in  full  communion. 
If  then  futh  a  one  may  be  a  vifible  faint,  having  and  holding 
forth  credible  evidence  of  inward  fan6iihcation  :  If  fuch  a  one 
may  be  able  to  profefs  the  chriftian  religion  without  known  hy- 
pocrify,  heartily  allbntinf^  and  confenting  to  it,  fo  tar  as  he  un- 
derfhnds  it,  and  knovvs  his  own  mind  and  heart.  If  fuch  a  one 
may  have  ftronger  reafons  to  think  it  is  his  right  and  duty  to  coir.e 
than  to  refrain  :  That  the  duties  and  privileges  of  a  member  \\\ 
full  communion  belong  to  him.  If  fuch  a  one  may  have  and  ex- 
hil)it  credible  evidence  ot  a  meafure  of  actual  fitncfs  for  commu- 
nion with  a  church  in  f^>cciaj  ordinances  ;  and  if  there  be  no 
known  bar  in  the  way  of  his  coming,  and  being  admitted  ;  muit 
we  not  conclude,  that  he  has  a  right  to  be  admitted,  and  is  bound 
and  has  a  warrant  to  come. 

1  prefume  none  will  deny  that  fuch  a  one  has  a  right  to  be  admit- 
ted a<j  a  vifible  faint  in  thejull  account  of  the  church.  A  credible 
profelhon  of  chriOianity,  with  evidence  of  a  mealure  of  actual 
fitnefs  tor  fpecial  ordinances  will  entitle  to  this.  And  none  will 
fay  that  all  luch  credible  prcjfellbrs  aie  converted.  All  the  doubt 
is,  wl^ciherone  who  is  unconverted  may  have  a  right,  a  warrant, 
a  fuiftcicni  realun,  a  weigiitier  iaduccmtnt  to  ccmcihun  to  refrain  ; 

ror 


77?e  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion,       gi 

Fori  have  before  (hewn,  that  thcfe  feveral  phrafes  amount  to  the 
fame  thing. 

To  bring  the  queflion  then  to  its  proper  ftatement,  let  it  beob- 
ferved,  that  it  is  not  enquired  whether  thofe  who  know  them- 
felves  to  be  unconverted,  or  who  iind  no  heaitor  freedom  to  ai- 
fent  to  the  dodlrincs,  and  confent  or  fubmit  to  the  laws  of  Chrifl:, 
have  a  right  to  profefs,  in  known  hypocrify,  and  fojoin  thcmfelves 
to  the  ciiurch,  :;nd  come  to  its  ordinances.  This  would  doubt- 
lefs  be  prefu  in  prion. 

Further.  The  queflion  is  not  whether  tliofe  may  come  who 
can  find  no  pofitive  evidence  in  themfelvcs  that  they  believe  the 
gofpel,  and  confent  to  the  covenant  of  grace  therein  propofed. 
\Vithout  this  no  one  is  warranted  to  make  a  profeflion  of  chrif- 
tianity.     Thefe  arc  all  excluded  by  the  rules  above  laid  down. 

So  that  the  queilion  will  come  to  this,  whether  any  can  have 
the  warrants  and  encouragements  to  come  into  church  commu- 
nion, which  have  been  (hewn  to  be  fufficient,  and  ought  to  have 
more  weight  to  determine  the  conduit  tlian  any  fcrupL^^s  anddif- 
couragemcnts  tc  tlie  contrary,  and  yet  be  unconverted.  Let  us 
review  the  particulars. 

Will  any  deny  that  an  unconverted  man  may  be  morally  fin- 
cere  in  profefllng  chriftianity  ?  Is  it  a  certain  mark  of  inward 
fanclification  for  one  to  find  that,  (o  far  as  he  knows  hlm.felf,  and 
underftands  the  gofpel,  he  holds  it  for  true,  approves  of  it,  and 
refolves  to  make  it  the  rule  of  his  faith  and  praclice  ?  Is  it  not 
polFible,  nay  credible  that  fome  who  are  not  confcious  of  hypo- 
crify may  not  be  upright  in  the  fight  of  God  ? 

Will  any  fay  that  no  unconverted  man,  upon  examining  him- 
felf  can  find  credible  reafons  to  hope,  that  he  does  rightly  undcr- 
fland,  affent  to,  approve  the  gofpel,  and  refolve  without  delayer 
referve  to  feek  falvation  in  the  way  there  revealed  ?  Or  is  every 
one  converted  who  can  find  any  credible,  though  uncertain  evi- 
dence of  thefe  things  in  himfelf?  May  not  a  man  have  fome 
grounds  of  hope,  who  has  not  certain  evidence  of  his  good  eftate  ? 
Is  no  evidence  of  faith  credible  but  fuch  as  is  found  only  in  true 
believers,  and  fo  is  infallible  ?  And  is  it  not  fuppofeable  that  fucli 
marks  of  faving  convcrfion  as  are  not  infallible,  however  they  may 
give  reafon  of  hope,  may  be  found  in  fome  who  are  not  favingly 
converted  ? 

May  not  an  unconverted  man  be  a  vjfible  faint  in  the  jufl  ac- 
count of  his  own  confcience,  as  well  as  of  the  church  ?  And  is 
he  not  fo,  if  he  finds  in  himfelf  hopeful  evidences  of  being  a  true 
chriftian,  the  holding  forth  of  which  entitles  him  to  admilfion  to 
external  communion  ? 

May  not  an  unconverted  man  be  int&refied  in  the  covenant  in 
refpstS  of  its  outward  adminiftration  ?  Is  not  this  the  cafe  of  all 

the 


^2        The  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion. 

the  unconverted  children  of  church  members  as  long  as  they  llvf, 
wulci's  they  arc  cut  off  according  to  the  rule  or  the  gofpel,  for 
known  covenant  breaking,  impenitently  perfilltd  in?  Want  of 
inward  fanclification,  while  it  is  not  evident,  nor  kundalous,  does 
not,  according  to  the  gofpcl  rule,  uncovenant  one,  or  dilquahfy 
juni  fur  continuing  a  rightful  member.  Have  not  rightful  church 
inembers  a  right  to  come,  and  be  admitted  to  the  outward  ordi- 
nances J  which  are  granted  by  covenant  not  to  the  invifiblc  church, 
ns  fuch,  hut  to  vifible  inftituted  churches  ?  Ought  any  one  to  be 
debarred  or  refrain  from  coming,  if  neither  he  nor  the  church 
has  evidence  that  he  is  unqualified  ?  And  is  it  not  credible  that 
fomc  fuch  may  notwithftanding  be  unconverted  ? 

Js  it  unlawful  for  rhcfe  to  have  communion  with  an  inflitutcd 
church  in  the  ufe  of  outward  ordinances,  who  are  not  prohibited 
by  tlie  gofj)el  from  comini^,  or  being  admitted  r  Are  any  inter- 
di6^ed  in  the  gofpel  but  fuch  as  evidently  want  the  requifite  quah- 
fications  ?  And  may  not  fome  be  unconverted  who  appear  not 
\o  be  unqualified  for  external  comiiumion  ? 

Have  not  thofc  a  warrant  to  ufe  fpecial  ordinances  who  have 
rcafon  to  think  it  is  their  right  and  duty  fo  to  do  ?  Have  not  thofe 
reafon  thus  to  think,  who  have  credible  evidence  that  they  are 
interfiled  in  the  covenant,  qualified  to  come  and  be  admitted  to 
ordinances  ?  And  may  not  fome  unconverted  have  credible  and 
hopeful  figns  and  evidence  of  this  ?  Or  will  any  fay  that  certain 
evidences  of  grace  are  neceflary  to  give  one  a  warrant  to  a£^  in 
this  cafe  ?  Or,  that  uncertain  figns  never  fail,  that  is,  are  infal- 
lib!:  ? 

Should  any  think  that  no  unconverted  man  lias  credible  evi- 
dence that  he  is  fmcere,  or  qualified  in  any  meafure  for  the  duties 
or  privileges  of  external  communion,  or  has  a  right  or  warrant  to 
conic  to  them,  that  no  fuch  perfon  has  good  reafon  to  think  he 
ought  rather  to  come  than  rcfVain  ;  he  mufl  at  tlie  fame  time 
hold,  that  no  one  has  a  warrant  to  come  unlcis  he  has  certain 
and  infuHii)le  evidence  of  fanv^lification.  For  thofc  marks  and 
evidences  which  are  found  only  in  true  faints,  and  not  in  any  un- 
converted man,  arc  certain  and  infallible.  Upon  this  fuppofition, 
every  one  may  be  as  furc  of  his  being  a  true  laint,  as  that  he  finds 
any  grounds  for  a  comfortable  hope.      Dut  will  any  fay  this  ? 

1  (lull  only  add,  that  if  doubtful  evidences  of  fanc^ificatioa 
may  furnlfh  one  with  a  good  warrant  to  come  into  church  com- 
•.vjunion,  it  being  niore  reafbnable  and  fife  for  hicli  a  one  to  come 
'lan  refrain,  as  all  feem  to  allow;  and  if  there  may  be  fucli 
Joubiful  credible  figns  of  grace,  and  fitnef^  for  the  duties  ar.d 
privileges  of  external  comiuinion  in  fome  who  are  unconverted; 
which  cannot  be  denied,  unlcfs  wc  fay  tliat  doubtful  cvide;ice  is 

certain 


The  Right  of  the  Vnconverted  to  External  Communion.         c.3 

certain  and  infallible  ;  I  fee  not  but  that  vvc  muft  conclude,  that 
fome  who  are  unconverted  may  have  a  right  or  warrant  to  come, 
as  well  as  be  admitted  to  external  communion,  which  was  to  be 
proved. 


SECTION    TL 

OhjeSi'ions  conjidered. 

OBJECTION  I .  If  grace  be  not  necefiary  to  give  a  right  to 
fpecial  ordinances,  why  are  none  allowed  to  come  or  be  admitted 
but  thofe  who  have  and  exhibit  evidence  of  grace  ?  If  moral  fm- 
cerity  be  fufficient,  why  (hould  any  thing  more  be  profeiTcd  or 
maniferied  ? 

Anfiuer.  It  is  the  evidence,  and  not  the  reality  of  grace  which 
gives  a  profellor  a  right  or  warrant  to  come,  and  the  church  a 
warrant  to  receive  him.  Wherever  this  evidence  appears,  this 
right  is  annexed  to  it :  Whether  there  be  a  foundation  for  if  in 
the  reality  of  the  thing  intimated  by  it,  or  not.  It  is  granted  by 
all,  that  probable  evidence  is  a  reafonable  and  fufficient  warrant 
to  aJl  upon  in  this  cafe:  That  is,  it  gives  a  right  to  aift :  And 
yet  we  know  that  what  is  probable  fometimes  has  no  real  exig- 
ence. But  the  rights  and  duties  founded  upon  probabilities  are 
as  real,  as  certain,  and  as  important  as  any.  Whoever  has  and 
gives  evidence  of  moral  fmcerity  in  profefTmg  chriftianity,  has 
and  gives  evidence  of  faving  grace.  For  moral  fincerity,  in  fuch 
a  profeliicn,  is  itfelf  a  credible  evidence,  as  has  been  ihewn. 

ObjeSi.  2.  If  fome  have  a  right  of  accels  to  ordinances  in  the 
fight  of  God  who  are  unconverted,  and  yet  the  church  may  net 
admit  them,  unlefs  in  their  fight  and  judgment  they  are  true 
faints  ;  then  the  eye  of  man  mu'it  require  higher  terms  than  the 
eye  of  God. 

Jnfiu.  They  .who  have  a  right  to  ordinances  according  to 
the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  have  a  right  in  the  fight  of  God.  Vifiblc 
faints,  according  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  have  a  riglit  to  the  or- 
dinances. Credible  profefTors  arcvifible  faints  in  the  view  of  the 
church,  and  have  a  right  of  admilhon.  ProfelTors,  whofchearis 
condemn  them  not  of  hypocrify,  are  vifible  faints  in  the  view  of 
confcience,  and  have  a  right  of  accefs.  The  eye  of  man  looks 
for,  or  requires  no  higher  terms  than  the  eye  of  God  ;  but  the 
very  fame,  that  is,  vifiUe  faintjh'ip.  Charity  hopes  that  vifible  faints 
iare  fincere,  but  knows  it  is  uncertain  whether  they  are  fo  or  x\c. 
7\hat  rational  evidence  of  gofpel  hohnefs  which  gives  a  right  of 

admifllon  5 


94         ^^^'  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Commun'ionl 

admi/Tlon  ;  and  that  charitable  belief  which  the  church  is  to  have 
of  the  faintlhipof  thofe  whom  they  receive  to  communion,  leaves 
it  (lill  a  matter  of  uncertainty  in  the  eye  of  the  church's  chriltian 
judgment,  whether  they  are  faints  indeed.  Nor  lias  (jod  made 
it  ncceflary  for  us  to  believe  that  men  are  truly  pious  in  order  to 
its  being  our  duty  to  admit  them.  We  are  allowed,  nay  required 
to  admit  credible  profelTors,  be  our  opinion  of  them  what  it  may. 
If  we  are  uncharitable,  that  is  our  fault,  which  will  not  jurtify  our 
refufing  tl\ofe  who  hold  forth  credible  evidence  of  chriftian  piety. 
It  is  the  evidence  exhibited,  and  not  the  judgment  or  opinion  we 
may  .form  of  profeffors,  which  God  has  made  necefiary  in  or- 
der to  our  lawfully  admitting  them  to  communion. 

It  is  not  therefore  true  that  the  church  is  required  and  allowed 
to  admit  none,  but  fuch  as  are  truly  pious  in  their  fight,  or  whom 
they  judge  to  be  fuch.  P'or  they  are  allowed  and  required  to  ad- 
mit all  ivho?n  they  have  reafon  to  account  truly  pious,  in  a  judgment 
of  charity,  whether  they  are  fuch  in  their  fight  and  judgment  or 
not.  And  they  have  reafon  thus  to  judge  of  all  credible  profdlbrs, 
though  they  know  it  to  be  uncertain  whether  they  are  truly  pious. 
Again,  It  is  not  true  that  churches  are  forbidden  to  admit  any,  uu- 
lefs  they  tirrt  have  evidence  obliging  them  to  believe  it  certain  \.\\-3it 
they  havegofpelholinefs.  VVe  know  that  all  the  evidence  we  ordi- 
narily can  have  in  the  cafe  muft  leave  us  uncertain  of  this.  It  can 
in  reafon  only  oblige  us  to  believe  that  it  is  credible  or  prcbaile  tkcy 
arejaints^  though  polTibly  they  may  be  but  Iiypocrites.  Now,  If 
fome  for  whom  the  church  ought  to  have  charity,  and  who  are  in 
their  eye  true  faints,fo  far  as  their  eye  can  difGcrn,may  yet  be  uncon- 
verted, and  if  thefe  according  to  the  rule  of  t  he  gofpel  ought  to 
be  admitted  to  communion,  then  fandifying  grace  is  not  necefia- 
ry, though  credible  evidence  of  it  is  necefiary  to  give  a  right  cf 
admifiion.  Again — If  they  who  can  profefs  the  chrifiian  religi- 
on unconfci  . -us  of  hypocrify,  and  who  know  nothing  of  them- 
felves  whicli  would  prove  that  they  are  infmccre,  have  reafon 
comfortably  tc  hope  tint  they  arc  the  fubjecfts  of  fanclifying  grace, 
and  certainly  to  conclude  that  they  are  vifiblc  faints  in  the  eye  of 
confcience,  and  if  fuch  have  reafon  to  think  it  is  their  duty  and 
right  to  come  into  church  communion,  as  has  bean  argued  ;  and 
if  it  be  fuppofeablc  that  lome  of  this  charad^er  may  not  be  true 
faints,  then  fan^tifying  grace  is  not  necefiary,  though  credible  evi- 
dence of  grace  is  necefiary  to  give  a  right  ot  acccfs. 

OhjeH.  3.  None  have  truly  a  right  to  take  and  ufenny  covenant 
privilege  but  thofe  who  are  really  in  the  covenant  :  none  are  in 
the  covenant,  who  do  not  comply  with,  or  |)ofid"s  the  condition 
or  terms  of  it  ;  and  lifis  none  do  but  true  h-elievers.  I'  or  faving 
faith,  or  a  cordial  confent  to  the  terms  of  the  gofpel,  is  the  condi- 
tion 


Ilje  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion,       95 

tloa  of  a  covenant  intereft  and  right.  But  unconverted  finners 
do  not  confent  to  the  covenant,  but  rejed  it,  and  fo  have  no  right 
to  any  of  its  benefits. 

Anjwer,  It  is  not  true  that  none  have  a  right  to  take  and  ufe 
•any  covenant  privilege  but  thofe  who  are  in  the  covenant.  All 
gofpel  ordinances  are  covenant  privileges.  Yet  thofe  who  are 
not  in  covenant  have  a  lawful  right  to  attend  to  the  difpenfatioa 
of  the  word,  to  have  and  fearch  the  fcriptures,  whenever  provi- 
dence puts  them  into  their  hands,  and  to  join  with  the  church  in 
ailembling  and  worfhipping  God.  It  is  granted,  however,  that 
none,  but  thofe  who  are  in  covenant  have  a  coveyiant  right  to  thefe 
privileges,  and  that  there  arc  fome  privileges  to  which  none  but 
thofe  who  are  in  covenant  can  have  a  regular  accefs.  Of  this 
kind  are  thofe  inftitutions  called  fpecial  ordinances,  which  are 
granted,  and  appropriated  to  the  church.     But  then. 

It  is  not  true  that  none  are  in  the  covenant  but  thofe  who  have 
complied  with  the  conditions  of  the  covenant.  For  the  children 
of  church  members  are  confefTedly  in  covenant,  and  of  the  church, 
before  they  are  capable  of  complying  with  any  terms  or  condi- 
tions ;  unlefs  we  call  their  being  born  of  church  members  a  com- 
pliance with  the  condition,  though  it  be  no  a6^  of  the  children  ; 
yet  the  covenant  grants  a  baptifm  right,  with  other  fpecial  church 
privileges  to  fuch  children,  though  numbers  of  them  are  uncon- 
verted. So  that  unconverted  perfons  may  really,  rightfully,  and 
in  the  fight  of  God  be  interelted  in  the  covenant,  fo  as  to  be  re- 
gular members  of  an  inftituted  church,  and  intitled  to  fpecial  pri- 
vileges pertaining  to  the  outward  adminiftration  of  the  covenant : 
And  according  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel  they  muft  continue  fucli 
as  long  as  they  live,  unlefs  they  afypear  to  be  unfit  and  unworih}'. 

Tlierefore — It  is  not  true  that  faving  faith,  or  a  cordial  conftnt 
to  the  covenant,  is  the  condition  of  an  intereft  in  it,  as  outwardly 
adminifiered,  and  of  aright  to  outward  church  privileges.  It  is 
indeed  the  invilible  condition  of  a  right,  to  inviiiblc  privileges  and 
blefTings  difpenfed  immediately  by  Chrifi.  But  a  right  of  ad- 
mifiion  to  outward  privileges  is  annexed  to  conditions  or  qualifi- 
cations difcerjiable  by  men  ;  viz.  a  credible  profeffion  of  dirifii- 
anity.  And  it  is  the  right  and  duty  of  thofe  who  can  and  do 
profefs  chriHianity  unconfcious  of  infincerity  to  all:  for  and  ufe 
thefe  privileges,  lliough  we  are  not  certain  that  fuch  a  profefibr 
is  a  fuiiit  inwardly,  or  intitled  to  the  invlfible  blcflings  of  the  co- 
venant, yet  we  may  be  certain  that  he  is  a  faint  outwardly,  and 
may  come  and  l)e  admitted  to  the  outward  privileges  of  an  inlii- 
tutod  church. 

Oijidf.  4.  The  unconverted  are  forbidden  to  own  \\\c  cove- 
nant.    "  To  the  wicked  God  faith  what  halt  thcu  to  do  that  thou 

(liouldeft 


96       The  R-'r^ht  zf  the  Unconvcrltd  to  External  Communion, 

fhouldcfl  declare   my  ftatutes,  or  take   my  covenant   into   thy 
mouih  ?" 

ji-fifwer. — I  gratit  it  would  be  unlawful  for  tliofe  profefledly  to 
covenant  wiili  Ciod,  who  had  at  tiie  fame  time  convincing  evi- 
dence tb.at  their  profellions  were  but  hypocrify,  which  appears  tc; 
Jnve  been  tlie  cliaraclor  pointed  at  in  ihe  text.  Tl.ey  who  arc 
evidently  wicked,  would  but  enhance  their  guilt  by  owning  the  cov- 
enant, and  attending  ordinances  hypocritically  for  a  prerenoe, 
Kut  we  never  find  men  reproved  for  entering  into  covenant,  when 
they  did  it  lincorcly,  fo  far  as  iliey  knew  themfelyes.  By  the 
wicked  we  are  here  to  ur.derlbnd  ihoie  wlio  ap^rar  tj  bf.  fo^  by  fuch 
black  nisirks  of  impenitcncy  as  we  find  in  the  following  context. 
But  thefe  words  were  never  meant,  to  difcourngc  thofe  who  feri- 
cuily  and  without  known  hypocrify,  dcfire  to  own  the  coven«int, 
and  walk  in  the  commandments  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  ;  but 
Ihofe  only  who  are  forw9rd  to  make  a  public  profefhon,  while  al- 
lowing themfelves  in  known  wickedncfs.  Jn  llioft,  as  evident 
qiithf.:.itions  alone  give  a  right  to  ordinances,  fo  they  only  who 
are  evidently  wicked  are  liere  forbidden  and  debarred  from  coming 
to  them. 

It  is  moft  certain  that  none  are  allowed  to  make  a  lying  pro- 
fefTion.  But  this  is  not  done  by  thofe  wlio  profefs  in  moral  fm- 
cerity.  For  how  any  one  can  lie  in  veracity  I  underhand  not. 
If  men  fulfil  not  their  covenant  engagements  they  are  no  doubt 
highly  blameable.  But  this  proves  not  that  it  was  unlawful  for 
tliem  to  come  under  thefe  bonds.  If  we  may  not  form  good  re- 
folutlons  till  we  know  we  Ihall  fulfil  them,  I  fear  it  will  be  long 
before  men  will  begin  the  work  of  repentance,  or  engage  in  cam- 
cil  in  the  practice  of  neglected  duties. 

Objrtl.  5.  In  Matth.  \\\\,  11,  12.  wc  read, — **  When  the 
king  came  in  to  fee  the  gu^Mh,  he  faw  there  a  man  which  had  not 
on  a  wedding  garment.  And  he  faid  unto  h.im.  Friend,  how 
cameft  thou  in  hither  not  having  a  wedding  garment  ?  and  he 
was  fpjccchlefs." — Sinee  he  was  blamed  for  coming  in  without  a 
^vedding  garment,  and  had  nothing  to  anfwer,  it  is  argued  that 
none  have  a  warrant  to  come  into  the  \^il!ble  cluirch  without 
fan^ifying  grace. 

I  fhall  not  avail  myfcjf  of  that  common  obfervation,  that  argu- 
ments founded  on  circumfhinces  in  parable  are  too  precarious  to 
be  much  depended  on,  fincc  fimilitudcs  feldom  hold  in  every  cir- 
cumfiancc  :  If  we  attend  carefully  to  the  parable  nlelf,  we  Ihall 
find  no  foundation  for  this  conclufion. 

By  the  kingdom  of  heaven  all  agree  that  the  church  is  to  be 
underftood  ;  the  fiipper  lignifies  the  privileges  to  which  rightf  li 
and  <juqlified  mc:nbcrs  are  admitted.     'Fhc  wedding  girmer.i  is 

luC 


^he  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  Externsil  Communion,       97 

the  qualification  for  thefe  privileges.  The  man  without  it,  is  one 
who  comes  unqualified  To  partake  of  them,  vvlio  v;hen  challeng- 
ed for  his  prcfumption  has  nothing  to  anfwer,  ib  is  caft  out. 

But,  is  this  feail  on  earth,  or  in  heaven  ?  Does  it  fignify  the 
privileges  and  enjoyments  of  the  vifible  church  here,  or  of  the 
myftical  church  in  the  future  ftate  ?  The  determination  of  this 
queftion  mull  determine  how  the  parable  muft  be  expounded. 

Many  underftand  the  marriage  feulT:  of  the  bleflednefs  of  the 
heavenly  ftate.  The  wedding  garment  mud  then  mean  the  right- 
eoufnefs  of  the  faints.  The  man  without  the  wedding  garment 
is  one  who,  without  this  rightcoufnefs,  comes  to  partake  of  the 
joys  of  heaven  ;  which  is  agreeable  to  what  is  elfewhere  intimat- 
ed, of  fome  who  at  the  day  of  judgment  will  come,  and  beg  in 
vain  to  be  admitted  into  heaven.  The  King^s  coming  in  to  fee 
the  guefts,  is  Chrift's  coming  at  the  day  of  judgment.  So  Mr. 
Stoddard  and  Mr.  Edwards  both  underhand  it.  Then  they  who 
ebme  to  partake  of  the  joys  of  heaven,  without  that  holinefs  and 
rightcoufnefs  without  which  no  man  (hall  fee  the  Lord,  will  be 
reprimanded,  filenced,  and  banifhed  to  outer  darknefs. 

If  this  be  the  fenfe  of  the  parable,  it  teaches  us  that  the  un- 
fanclified  (hall  not  partake  with  true  faints  of  the  joys  of  heaven  ; 
but  it  proves  not  that  fuch  cannot  be  rightful  members  of  an  in- 
ftituted  church,  or  lawfully  come  to  fpecial  ordinances.  When  it 
was  faid  to  the  man,  How  cam.efl  thou  in  hither  without  a  wed- 
ding garment  ?  the  meaning  cannot  be,  How  cameft:  thou  into 
the  inftituted  church,  and  to  have  external  communion  in  ordi- 
nances without  grace  ?  He  is  not  blamed  for  coming  to  ordi- 
nances without  a  warrant,  but  for  coming  to  enjoy  heavenly  blifs 
without  holinefs.  For,  Fir/i.  Many  unconverted  perfons  arc 
rightfully  members  of  the  inflituted  church.  They  were  born  in 
it,  and  fo  brought  in  by  God  himfelf  while  gracelefs.  Thefe  are 
not  to  be  blamed  for  intruding  into  the  houfe,  if  by  the  houfe  we 
underftand  the  vifible  church,  however  blamcable  they  are  for  con- 
tinuing gracelefs  under  the  means  they  are  favoured  with. — 
Secondly,  At  the  day  of  judgment  there  will  be  no  vifible  infiitut- 
ed  church,  or  outward  ordinances  for  any  to  come  to  or  be  in. 
There  will  be  no  fuch  houfe  ftanding,  no  provifion  made  tliercin 
for  the  entertainment  of  any.  The  coming  of  Chrift  will  in- 
ftantly  diflblve  all  iiillituted  churches,  and  aboIiHi  the  outward  or- 
dinances., Thefe  tabernacles  provided  for  our  prefent  accom- 
modation will  then  be  removed,  with  all  their  a{)paratus.  It  is 
not  in  the  vifible  church  that  the  heavenly  feaft  is  he'd,  and  into 
which  the  king  comes  at  the  day  of  judgment  to  fee  the  gucfls,  or 
where  he  fees  the  man  v^irhout  the  v.edding  garment.  I'lv^t  is 
impoilible  j  fince  the  vifible  church  will  .then  be  no  more. — 
N  ILitdiy 


98         TJj:  Ri^ht  of  the  Uncoiverted  to  External  Communion, 

Thirdly.  The  inflituted  church  is  the  apartment  into  which  men 
were  invited  and  introduced  by  the  fervanis  to  drcfs  and  prepare 
thcmfelves  fur  the  lieavenly  tealt,  putting  on  the  wedding  gar- 
ment orrighteoufnefs..  It  is  by  attending  the  ordinances  given 
to  the  church  that  men  are  prepared  for  the  blelTedncfs  of  the 
heavenly  tl.ac.  Now  though  the  unconverted  are  not  prepared 
for  heaven,  this  proves  not  that  it  is  un\\arrantable  for  fuch  to 
life  the  means  wtiereby  they  may  become  prepared,  and  attend 
the  ordinances  of  the  inllituted  church  for  tliat  end.  Some  who 
sre  not  inward  faints,  may  yet  be  vifible  faints  \  and  to  fuch  tlic 
ordinances  are  given* 

But  if  wc  fuppofe  the  marriage  feail  to  be  held  in  the  kingdom 
of  licavcn  upon  earth,  that  is  in  the  inftiruted  church,  and  to  de- 
note the  outward  ordinances  and  privileges  there  enjoyed,  then 
the  parabie  muft  be  expounded  conformably  to  this  hypothefis  : 
Thus — the  Jews  were  firfl:  invited  into  the  gofpel  church,  but 
refufcd  to  come.  Then  the  invitation  was  fent  to  the  Gentiles, 
many  of  whom  were  gathered  in.  The  wedding  garment  is  the 
qualification  for  regular  external  communion,  that  is,  vifible  faint- 
Ihip.  The  man  without  a  wedding  garment  was  a  fcandalous 
perfon,  who  contrary  to  the  gofpel  rule  had  thruft  himfelf  in, 
though  he  was  not  a  vifible  faint ;  fo  did  not  appear  clothed  \w 
the  livery  ot  the  king.  The  king  coming  in  to  fee  the  guefts  fig- 
nifies  Chrift  vifiting  and  infpe£^ing  his  vifible  churches  as  their 
political  head,  which  is  done  by  the  inilrumentality  of  thofe  who 
in  his  name  ars  to  maintain  fpiritual  government  in  and  over  the 
houfe  of  God,  and  fee  that  the  ordinances  of  government  and 
difeipline  are  duly  executed.  Notice  is  taken  of  one  who  appears 
not  in  the  garb  of  a  credible  profeffion,  but  had  either  cart  it  off, 
or  at  leail  was  become  fcandalous,  and  fo  unfit  for  external  com- 
inunion.  V.  hen  called  to  an  account  he  is  convicted,  and  has 
nothing  to  anfwer.  ^I'hcn  the  King  ia'icl^  Chrift  by  the  gofpel  rule 
ga\c  order  (ior  Chrill  fpeaks  in  his  viliblt  cbuich  only  by  his  wrii- 
ten  word) — i  ie  laid  to  hn  (ervants^  his  miniflcrs,  to  whom  the  keys 
of  the  kinj^uom  of  heaven  are  committed,  who  keep  th'e  doors  of 
the  houfe,  ami  are  authorized  in  his  name  to  bind  ^ni\  loo/e  :  He 
faid  to  them — Bind  hum  hand  ami  foot — lay  him  under  cenfura — 
take  him  away — excommunicate  him — ca/i  him  into  outer  darknefs. 
Let  him. be  as  a  heathcii,  as  thofe  who  are  in  the  darknefs  of  in- 
fidelity, and  fu!  jed  to  the  fpirit  who  tulei>  in  the  children  of  dark- 
nefs ami  difobedieuce.  There  (hall  be  weeping  and  j^naHiing  of 
teeth.* 

If 

*  Mr.  HtMiry  lias  this  note  on  the  parable.  '*  Their  is  a  binding  in  t}i;s 
vroild  b\  the  Icivaiits,  ihcuuuiUct>,  \>lioIc  fuf|»ciiJiiiL;  ufieiions  that  walk 

diiyrdcrly 


The    Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Commtmim,       99 

If  the  man  without  the  wedding  garment  was  ordered  to  be 
caft  out  of  the  vifible  church,  as  having  no  right  to  have  external 
communion  in  ordinances,  he  was  certainly  a  fcandilous  man 
and  excommunicated  as  fuch.  PV  Chrift  gives  no  orders  to  his 
fervants  to  caft  any  out  of  the  vifible  church  but  thofe  who  are 
fcandalous.  But  though  fcandalous  perfons  ou2;ht  not  to  come 
to  cnurch  communion,  this  proves  not  that  no  unconverted  per- 
fons may  lawfully  come.  For  fome  of  thefe  are  vifible  faintv, 
and  not  Icandalous. 

•Ohjerl.  6.  The  covenant  of  grace  is  a  covenant  of  falvation. 
How  tnen  can  thofe  who  arc  not  in  a  (late  of  falvation  be  in  the 
covenant,  or  have  a  right  to  any  of  its  fpecial  Drivileo-es. 

Jnfw.  The  covenant  Gfgrace  contains  a  pmrnifel^f  falvation 
tor  true  believers,  who  are  interefted  therein  in  refpcct  of  its  in- 
vnible  admmiilration.  It  has  alfo  grants  of  external  privilefres 
ior  vihble  i^uits,  who  are  intereded  therein  in  rcfpcdi  of  its  ex- 
ternal adminiih-ation,  as  has  been  argued  at  large  in  difcourfm^ 
on  the  covenant;  and  is,  I  think,  generally  acknowjedaed,  tho"^ 
It  leems  to  be  forgotten  by  thofe  who  urge  this  obje6tion.  Now 
ipecial  ordinances  being  external  covenant  privileges,  why  may 
not  vifible  faints  have  a  right  to  ufe  them,  even  fuppofin^  thev 
are  not  faints  in  heart  ?  And  if  a  profeffion  of  faith  morahy  fin- 
cere,  conilitutes  a  man  a  vifible  faint  in  the  account  of  the  church 
and  of  his  own  confcience,  this  is  the  condition  or  qualification 
to  which  the  gofpel  rule  annexes  a  right  to  the  ordinances  in 
their  outward  adminiftration. 

ObjeSi,^  7.  Sacraments  are  feals  of  the  covenant,  not  only  for 
the  conhrmation  of  its  truth,  but  alfo  feals  applied  (o  the  com- 
municant as  a  party,  appropriating  the  blcfiings  of  the  covenant 
to  him.  How  then  can  they  rightfully  belong  to  one  whoac 
cepts  not  of  the  covenant,  but  reje<5is  it  ? 

Jnfiver.  It  is  true  none  have  a  right  to  the  feals  but  thcv 
who  are  in  the  covenant.  But  vifible  faints  are  in  the  covenant 
m  Its  outvyard  adminiftration,  though  fomc  are  not  in  it  fo  as  t^ 
be  entitled  to  its  invifible  faving  bleifings.  Now  the  facrament. 
feal  tlic  covenant  of  grace,  with  all  its  privileges,  promifes  and 
obiigations  to  and  upon  thofe  who  are  in  covenant.  But  thev 
lea  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  covenant.  Abfohite  promifes 
and  grants  (including  fuch  as  are  become  abfolute  by  the  fulfil 


ment 


difordcHy  to  the  fcandal  of  religion  is  called  binding  them,  Mat.  xviii    n 

V  le  Jf  T.K^  'T  Pf '^"''^"r  °^  ^^'''''^  ordinance^,  and  Ihe  pecul  ar  n  l' 
vilegesot  their  church  nicmber/hip.     Bind    them  over   to   thr^  rin-t  Jl 
.udgmentof  God.     Take  hi-n  a.a^.     When  the  wick  dnf.  o   hvpt  •  e^ 
appears  they  are  to  be  taken  away  from  the  communion  of  .ho  faithfu     'j 
be  cut  off  as  withered  branches  "     But  I  find  no  cofpcl  rule  interdiAH 
the  ute  of  outward  ordinances  to  viHblc  faints  becaure^.nco  r;c  tcl^       ^ 


100        TJ)e  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communlonl 

mcnt  of  tlicir  conditions)  are  abfoliitcly  fcalcxi  and  confirmed  to 
thofc  to  whom  they  belong.  I'hus  the  promifes  of  pardon  and 
falvation  are  abfolutely  fealed  to  believers.  The  grantor  prom- 
ife  of  external  covenant  privileges  is  fealed  and  appropriated  ab- 
folutely to  vifible  faints.  Conditional  promifes  are  aifo  fealed 
with  a  fpecial  application  to  thofe  to  whom  the  feal  is  applied  ; 
aflurirvj^  them  not  abfulutely  that  they  Ihall  receive  the  bjcffrngj 
promiled,  but  tliat  the^'  in  pariicubr  fhall  certainly  receive  them 
upon  their  complying  with  the  condition.  But  the  facraments 
do  not  make  conditional  promifes  become  abfolute.  Nor  are 
tliey  a  feal  or  token  given  to  the  receiver,  teftifying  that  he  has 
complied  with  the  condition  of  all  the  promifes,  and  fo  is  abfo- 
hitely  entitled  to  them.  In  the  adminiftration  of  the  facrament 
ve  may  conceive  that  Chrirt  addreffes  every  rightful  communi- 
cant to  this  cfte6t :  "  This  covenant  is  fure  and  fteadfaft  to  you 
who  are  in  and  under  it.  It  belongs  to  you  ;  its  bonds  arc  on 
vou.  A  compliance  with  its  requirements  is  expeded  of  you  in 
particular.  Whatever  promifes  or  grants  you  are  entitled  to,  ac- 
cording to  the  tenor  of  the  covenant,  are  fealed  and  confirired 
abfolutely  to  you.  And  all  the  conditional  grants  and  promifes 
are  to  you,  and  arc  your's  upon  your  compliance  with  the  con- 
ditions. As  a  folem'a  feal  and  token  of  this,  take  and  eat  this 
fymbol,  or  memorial  of  my  body  broken  for  you,  to  purchafe 
and  feal  this  covenant — and  drink  ye  all  of  this  cup,  as  a  pledge 
of  the  new  covenant  in  my  blood  fhed  for  you.'* 

To  apply  the  feal  or  token  of  the  covenant  to  thofe  who  have 
no  interert  therein  would  indeed  be  like  fealing  a  blank.  But 
ylfible  faints  with  their  children  are  in  the  covenant,  fo  far  as  to 
liave  a  covenant  right  to  the  privileges  pertaining  to  its  external 
adminiftration.  And  the  facraments  are  to  them  a  feal  of  tlie 
covenant-T-^/.T?/ its  duties  are  in  a  peculiar  manner  binding  on 
tl;em  ;  that  foir.e  at  leaf!  of  its  grants  belong  to  them  abfolutely  ; 
that  its  conditional  offers  are  made  efpecial!y  to  them,  and  fliall 
be  theirs,  upon  their  acceptance  of  them,  yea,  it  they  do  not 
pofitlvely  rcjetSl  them  ;  snd  whether  they  comply  or  not  with  the 
conditions  on  w  liich  the  faving  grace  of  the  covenant  is  propofed 
to  their  acceptance,  yet  the  offer  (hall  be  continual  to  them  fo 
lon^  as  they  continue  vifible  faints  ;  the  privileges  of  the  kingdom 
of  CJod  fhall  not  be  taken  a\vay,unlcfs  they  put  them  away  by  a 
pofitivc  rcjeeHion  :  Finally,  the  indefinite  promifes  of  converting 
and  fnnai'fxjng  grace  made  abfolutely  to  the  \ifib!e  cluirch,  are 
ji. definitely  fealed  and  confirmed  to  the  members.  And  will  any 
fny  that  all  this  is  a  mere  blank,  a  mere  noticing  ? 

'The  facrameiUs  arc  not   a  feal  to  each  communicant,  that  all 
;  c  blcHu'irs  of  the  covcnaiu  'ubfulutclv  belong  to  hi»m,  whether 

hQ 


lor 


TJ)e  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion. 

he  accepts  of  them  or  not ;  or  that  he  has  complied  with  all  the 
conditions,  upon  which  all  the  blemngs  of  the  f^venant  ^e  of-^ 
fered  They  who  fo  imagine  deceive  themfelves.  There  are 
fome'covenant  bleffings  to  which  many  who  are  in  the  covenant 
and  even  many  true  believers  are  not  at  prefent  entitled,  as  not 
having-  vet  performed  the  condition  to  which  they  are  promued. 
Briefly  then,  the  feals  are  a  token  to  all  thofc  to  ^^^om  they  are 
rightfully  applied  :  That  the  covenant  is  fure  and  fteadfalt,  and 
its  promifes  mall  be  fulfilled  according  to  the  true  tenor  of  tncm: 
That  as  vifible  faints  they  have  a  covenant  right  to  attend  external 
ordinances,  and  enjoy  the  privileges  of  church  members  :  That 
if  they  are,  or  (hall  become  true  believers,  the  fpintual  blelTm^s 
of  the  covenant  are  or  (hall  be  theirs  :  That  if  the  facraments  or 
other  ordinances  are  zuorthify  ufed,  they  (hall  receive  the  fpiritual 
benefit  of  them.  But  they  are  not  applied  as  a  feal  or  token  trom 
Chrift  to  every  rightful  communicant,  that  he  is  a  wortoy  com- 
municant, or  a  true  believer,  or  entitled  abfolutely  to  ali  covenant 
bleffings.  There  is  a  difference  between  a  rtgntful  and  a  worthy 
attendance  on  ordinances.  The  Apoftle  difputes  not  the  right 
of  the  Corinthians  to  come  to  the  Lord's  fupper,  though  he 
blames  them  for  coming  unworthily. 

Objea.  8.  The  facraments  are  alfo  feals  on  the  part  ot  the 
receiver.  As  Chrift  in  and  by  them  gives  an  outward  fcal,  cr 
confirming  token  of  the  truth  and  (lability  of  all  the  grants  and 
promifes  of  the  covenant ;  fo  the  communicant  does  on  his  part 
folemnly  feal  his  acceptance  of,  and  confent  to  the  covenant.  i5ut 
this  no  unconverted  perfon  does  in  fincerity.  And  fince  it  is  un- 
lawful for  one  falfely  to  profefs,  and  then  feal  a  confent  to  the 
covenant,  the  unconverted  may  not  come  to  the  facraments. 

Anfiucr,     It  is  granted,  the  facrament  may  be  conlidered  as  a 
feal  on  the  part  of  the  receiver  ;  that  is,  a  confirming  token  of  ^ 
profeffion.      And  as   it    is    unlawful    f6r    any   to    pi-olefs    in 
known  hypocrify,  fo  it  would  be  aggravated  wickednefs  Xh  leal 
fuch  a  profeffion  at  the  Lord's  fupper.     None  may  come  to  this 
ordinance,  but  thofe  who  may  lawfully  and  warrantably  exhibit 
fuch  a  profeffion  as  (liall  give  them  a  right  of  admiffion.     If  no 
unconverted  man  can  witiiout  lying  make  fuch  a  profcflion  or 
reliction  as  would  entitle  him  to  admiflion,  it  would  he   plainly 
unlawful  for  liim  to  feal  the  fame  at  the  facrament.     But  who- 
ever profcfTes  in  moral  fincerity,  does  really  a(rcnt  and  confent  to 
the  gofpel,  {o  far  as  he  knows   himfelf.     He  is  not  confcious  of 
hypocjify.   He  does  not  wilfully  mifreprerent  his  own  fentimonts. 
Now  fuch  a  profeffior  cannot  be  jufily  charged  with  lying;  for  a 

Tie  is  a  wilful  mifrcprefentation.  ^ 

I  luppoie 


102     The  Right  of  the  Uncorrjerted  to  External  dmmumoK. 

I  fuppofe  it  will  not  be  denied,  that  whoever  finds  not  but  that 
he  does  believe  and  confcnt  to  the  gofpel,  may  and  ought  thus  to 
profcfs,  though  he  may  not  be  perfuaded  of  his  own  godly  fin- 
cerity,  To  docs  not  and  cannot  profefs  or  pretend  that  he  is  one 
of  this  chara6lcr.  I  adc  now,  has  fuch  a  profeflbr  a  right  of  ad- 
miirion  to  the  communion  of  the  church  ? 

U  he  ought  to  he  admitted  upon  fuch  a  profefTion,  then  he  has 
a  warrant  to  fcal  this  his  profefTion  at  the  Lord's  fupper  :  For  all 
who  have  a  warrant  to  profefs  that  which  gives  a  right  of  admif- 
fion,  have  a  right  to  come  and  feal  the  fame. 

But  if  fuch  a  profeiTor  is  not  to  be  admitted  unlefs  he  withal 
declare  abfolutely,  that  he  is  a  fmcere  chriftian,  if  tliis  be  the  pro- 
fefTion which  gives  a  right  of  admiffion,  and  is  to  be  fcaled  with 
the  facrament,  no  one  can  lawfully  thus  profefs,  if  he  has  the 
Icafl  doubt  of  his  own  fincerity.  For  we  may  not  abfolutely  af- 
fert  any  thing  for  truth,  of  which  we  have  any  duubt. 

Oh'jc5l,  9.  What  has  been  offered  in  anfwer  to  this  objecE^ion, 
may  alfo  ferve  to  obviate  the  objection  from  the  nature  and  fig- 
nificancy  of  facramental  actions  :  lliat  in  receiving  the  facra- 
ment the  communicant  makes  a  folemn  profefTion  of  faith,  love, 
gratitude  and  cordial  fubjeition  to  Chrift,  which  no  unfanctified 
man  can  truly  make.  The  facrament  may  indeed  be  termed, 
as  was  faid,  a  feal,  or  ratifying  token  of  our  chriflian  profefTion. 
But  the  facramental  asSlions  are  not  io  to  be  interpreted  as  to  fig- 
nify  or  imply  any  thing  more  than  is  contained  in  that  profefTion 
to  which  they  are  annexed  ;  efpecially,  as  1  find  no  fuch  interpre- 
tation given  in  the  fcriptures.  Kow  the  profefTion,  upon  v;hich  the 
primitive  chrillians  came  and  were  received  into  the  ciiurch,  was 
not  a  profefTion  of  aflurance,  or  confidence  in  their  own  godlincfs, 
but  of  faith  in  Chriil  as  the  Saviour  and  Lord,  the  fincerity  of 
which  was  afrervvards  to  be  proved  and  manifelled  by  its  fruits. 
And  though  in  receiving  the  facramental  elements  we  do  profefs 
to  receive  Chriil,  and  hope  for  falvation  only  through  him,  and 
sccording  to  the  tenor  of  the  new  covenant,  and  that  without 
known  rcfervc  or  hypocriiy  ;  yet  care  fliouM  be  taken  that  this 
be  not  fo  undcrfiood  as,  if  «  profcjjion  cf  knowing  our  own  hearts^  or 
having  a  perfuafion  that  we  are  faints  in  heart,  was  meant  to  be 
vinppcd  up,  and  implied  in  this  our  profefTion  :  For  this  would 
lay  a  lilock  in  tiie  way,  and  a  fnarc  on  the  confcicnce  of  the  v;eak 
•A\\(\  doubting  ;  who  murt  either  neglect  the  duty  and  privilege 
which  bcloii:;s  to  them  as  vifible  faints,  or  prefumc  on  making  a 
profcJTion,  the  truth  of  which  tb.ey  doubt. 

It  is  alfo  ftill  to  be  remembered,  that  the  qucftion  is  not, 
ivhdher  wi  unfimSl'ified  man  ever  docs^  while  fuch  corm  tOy  and  attend 
^'fpd ordinances  worthily^  fo  as  to  Inve  a  covenant  right  to  the  fpi- 

ritual 


Ilje  Right  of  the  Uncon'derted  to  Exte  rnal  Ccmmunlon,        103 

ritual  benefit  of  them.  We  grant,  that  no  fuch  perfon  is  in  a 
prcfent  capacity  to  eat  and  drink  in  the  manner  he  ought,  at 
the  Lord's  table,  or  to  attend  any  other  of  the  inllitutcd 
iHeans  of  religion.  Yet  this  proves  not  but  that  a  vifible  faint, 
though  unconverted,  may  as  lawfully  ufe  the  fpecial  ordinances 
granted  by  Chrift  to  the  vifible  church,  when  he  can  do  it  with- 
out known  hypocrify,  as  attend  any  ordinances,  or  do  any  other 
action  which  he  has  an  acknowledged  right  to  do.  Nor  does 
any  thing  appear  to  bar  his  right  of  acting  in  one  cafe,  more  than 
the  other.  At  the  fame  time  it  is  certain  that  none  are  allowed 
to  profane  any  divine  ordinance,  by  ufmg  it  in  an  unworthy- 
manner.  It  (hould  therefore  be  the  ferious  concern  of  every  one 
to  attend  every  ordinance,  and  do  every  thing  with  the  fpirir,  the 
principles  and  airns  of  a  fincerc  chriftian. 

OhjeSf.  1  o.  Thofe  have  no  fitnefs  in  themfelves  to  Gome  to 
the  privileges  of  the  church,  who,  if  they  were  known,  would 
not  be  fit  to  be  admitted  by  others.  But  unfanclified  men,  it 
they  were  known  to  be  fuch,  would  be  unfit  to  be  admitted,  and 
fo  have  no  right  to  come. 

I  anfwer.  What  gives  any  one  a  right,  and  in  that  refpedi  a 
fitnefs  to  be  admitted  to  church  privileges  is  credible  evidence  of 
grace.  Now  they  who  are  known  to  be  unfandified  want  evi- 
dence of  grace  :  For  it  is  impofTiblc  that  one  who  exhibits  cred- 
ible evidence  of  grace  fhould  be  known  to  be  gracelefs,  unlefs  by 
Supernatural  revelation.  But  it  is  not  the  want  of  grace, but  the 
want  of  credible  evidence  of  grace  which  renders  one  untit  for 
admifiion.  So  whoever  knows  himfeU  to  be  unfandtified,  wants 
thofe  evidences  of  fanclification  which  would  give  him  a  right  or 
warrant,  and  in  that  refpedl  a  fitnefs,  to  come  for  the  privileges 
©f  the  church  :  iince  it  is  impofTible  for  one  who  finds  credible 
evidence  of  fanclification  in  himfelf,  or  who  is  morally  fincere  in 
profelling  chrifHanity,  to  know,  except  by  fupernatural  revelation, 
that  he  is  gracelefs.  But  it  is  not  the  want  of  grace,  but  the  want 
of  this  evidence  of  grace,  which  renders  him  unfit,  as  wanting  a 
right  or  warrant  to  come.  For  though  credible  evidences  of  grace 
do  not  make  it  certain  that  a  man  is  a  true  faint,  yet  they  make 
it  certain  tb.at  he  has  a  right  of  admifhon,  and  a  warrant  to  come 
for  church  privileges,  as  we  have  before  argued  at  large,  and  is 
acknowled^c^cd  by  thofe  who  have  mofl:  objeded  to  the  right  of 
unfanclified  men  to  the  facrauients.  Thus  Mr.  Baxter,  whoop- 
pofed  Mr.  Blake,  yet  fays  exprcfsly,  "He  who  can  fay  I  am  i.ot 
certain  thit  I  truly  repent,  but  as  far  as  1  know  my  heart  i  do,  is 
not  to  be  hindered  from  thefacrament  by  that  uncertainty."  And 
Mr.  Edwards,  who  oppofed  Mr.  Stoddard's  principle,  fays, ''  Tfie 
beii  juti'^meut  \vc  can  form  after  all  propter  cnc'eavours  to  know 

tliC 


104       '^^^  Right  of  the  Unconvertid  to  External  Communion, 

the  truth,  mufl  govern  and  determine  us,"  plainly  acknowledging; 
that  it  is  our  right  and  duty  to  condu6l  ourfclves  according  to  it. 
Dr.  Mather  too,  while  difputing  againlt  Mr.  Stoddard,  fays,  "If 
after  fcrious  fclf-examinaiion,  a  man  cannot  but  hope  hc'isa  god- 
Jy  man,  lie  may  come,  though  he  hath  not  afTiiraiiLC  ;"  that  is,  he 
may  come  lawfulhy  or  has  a  right  or  warrant  to  come.  .And  all 
our  divines  and  cafuifts  feem  to  be  of  the  fame  judgment  ^  tho' 
many  fecm  not  to  liaveconfidcreil  that  this  is  in  cffc6t  an  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  right  of  fome  unfandtified  men  to  come  to  the 
facrament :  For  1  think  none  wiil  fay,  that  all  who  fee  reafon  to 
hope  that  they  are  converted  are  finccrc  chrii'.ians. 

Ohje^i.  II.  if  gracelcfs  peifons  who  are  irvLTally  fuiccre  may 
come  to  communion,  the  greateft  part  of  communicants  are  like 
to  be  not  only  gracelcfs,  but  void  of  moral  fmcerity.  For  moral 
fmcerity,  without  grace,  commonly  foon  vaniOies  ;  and  yet  thcfe 
if  not  fcandalous,  muft  continue  in  the  church  even  without  mor- 
al fmcerity. 

I  anfwcr.  Moral  fincerityin  profefTmg  chriftianity  is  a  credi- 
ble evidence  of  fan6tification.  Credible  evidence  gives  a  right  of 
admiliion  and  accefs.  Whenever  this  evidence  fails,  the  right  an- 
nexed to  it  becomes  void.  If  any  one  is  vifibly  unfit  for  com- 
munion, according  to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  he  is  to  be  debarred. 
If  any  one  finds  himfelf  unfit,  the  rule  forbids  his  coming.  If  he 
will  come  notwithflanding,  it  is  no  fault  in  the  rule,  but  the  fault 
is  wholly  in  thofe  who  tranfgrefs  it.  If  neither  the  church  nor 
the  profeflbr  find  any  unfitnefs,  he  ouglu  not  to  be  debarred,  or 
refrain  from  coming.  The  gofpel  rule  was  never  defigned  or  cal- 
culated to  keep  thofe  out  of  the  church  who  appear  not  to  be  un- 
fit for  communion,  be  their  inward  flate  what  it  may. 

I  would  humbly  wifli  ihofevvho  llius  object  to  confider  calmly 
•what  rule  they  would  have  for  chrirtians  to  try  themfelves  by,  in 
order  to  determine  whether  they  may  come  to  ordinances.  Would 
they  have  none  come  but  fuch  as  have  certain  evidence  of  fancli- 
fication  ?  No.  Would  they  have  thofe  come  who  find  credible 
evidence,  or  reafons  to  hope  they  are  finccre  ?  This  is  the  rule 
we  contend  for?  Will  they  fay  that  mora]  fmcerity  in  the  pro- 
feflion  of  chriOianiry  is  not  a  credible  evidence  of  fanciifying 
grace  ?  1  egnceive  that  it  is  as  good  evidence  as  can  ordinarily  be 
exhibited  in  any  profelhon,  as  has  been  argued.  W^ould  tluy 
liave  a  rule  which,  if  duly  obferved,  the  ^^/<v;/f;  /^^/Z  of  church 
members  fl^ould  be  true  faints  ?  W^ho  can  fay  but  that  the  great- 
er part  of  thofe  \\\\o  profcfs  chriftianiry  ur.confcious  of  hypocrify 
arc  fuch  ?  IJut  if  the  door  of  the  vifible  church  is  not  fo  narrow  but 
that  fonie  unconverted  may  go  in,  who  can  fav  whether  thegieut- 
er  part  of  thufc  who  enter  aic  of  this  characUr  r   What  terms  of 

communion 


*      Tfj;  Right  af  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion]       105 

communion,  which  any  unfan.Slified  man  can  come  up  to,  will  cer- 
tainly fecure  a  greater  number  of  true  faints  in  anychurcli?  How- 
ever, if  any  unfanil:ified  perfons  can  come  into  the  church  accord- 
ing to  the  rule  of  the  gofpel,  they  have  in  the  light  of  God  a  right 
to  come.  If  the  rule  allows  none  to  come  but  true  faints,  what 
right  have  we  to  tell  any  v*rhofe  faintihip  is  doubtful,  that  they 
may  and  mu/l  come  ? 

Obje£i.  12.  1  (hall  mention  but  one  objeftion  more.  Chriftf- 
ans  are  dire£led  to  examine  themfelves  in  coming  to  the  tabic  of 
the  Lord,  whether  they  are  the  fubjeds  of  fanctifying  grace. 
We  muft  then  conclude  that  the  Apoftle  would  not  have  them 
come,  unlefs  they  find  themfelves  true  faints. 

I  Ihall  not  repeat  what  others  have  faid  to  obviate  this  ob- 
jeflion.  Admitting  the  fenfe  here  given,  that  chriftians  Ihould, 
when  coming  to  the  Lord's  fupper,  examine  the  ftate  and  frame 
of  their  fouls,  whether  they  have  the  faith,  and  repentance,  the 
graces  and  virtues  of  true  chriftians  in  habit  and  exercife,  it  makes 
no  difficulty.  We  conftantly  fuppofe  that  chrilhans  not  only 
ought  to  exercife  the  graces  of  the  chridian  temper  when  they 
come,  and  that  they  cannot  otherwife  attend  worthily  upon  or- 
dinances, fo  as  to  have  a  covenant  riglit  to  the  fpiritual  benefit 
of  them,  but  that  they  ought  to  have  credible  evidence  in  their 
own  confciences  that  they  believe  in  Chrift,  repent  of  fin,  and 
refolve  without  delay  to  live  in  obedience  to  the  commandments 
of  God.  And  that  thofe  who  have  not  reafon  to  hope  they  are 
fmcere  ought  not  to  reproach  that  holy  ordinance,  in  which  they 
are  to  feal  a  profefled  confent  to  the  covenant.  And  that  a  feri- 
ous  examination  of  themfelves  is  a  fit  mean  of  their  judging  their 
fpiritual  fiate,  and  difcerning  the  reafons  of  hope  that  are  in  them, 
and  the  right  they  have  to  the  privileges  of  chrifiian  communion. 
And  if  upon  examining  ourfelves  we  find  fuch  evidences  of 
ehrifiian  piety,  as  I  fuppofe  every  one  who  can  profefs  chriHianitv 
in  moral  fincsrity  may  and  mufi:  be  confcioiis  of,  we  may  conclude 
that  we  have  certainly  a  right  and  warrant  to  come  to  the  Lord's 
fupper,  whatever  doubts  may  fiill  remain  rcfpcfling  our  (late.  For 
it  is  not  the  certainty  of  inward  fan£lifi:ation,  but  the  reality  of 
hopeful  and  credible  evidence  thereof  in  our  own  confcience, 
that  is  the  foundation  of  our  right  and  warrant. 

Other  objections  might  have  been  mentioned,  but  thefe  which 
have  been  noticed  feem  to  be  fomc  cf-thc  moif  coofidcrable.  I 
havealfoin  this  difeourfc  often  had  my  eye  upon  obje>5\ions  and 
difiiculties,  endeavouring  to  obviate  them  without  calling  tlicm 
up  to  viey.'. 

O 

SECTION 


izS       TJ?e  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion* 


SECTION     UI. 

Reconciling  Remarks* 

UPON  tlie  whole  view  of  tlie  cafe  before  iis,  I  humbly  con- 
ceive tfiat  tlie  difference  of  opinion  between  ChriHians,  who  have 
appeared  with  fo  much  zeal  on  different  fides  of  the  quellion, 
not  wiihout  fome  hard  thoughts  of  each  other,  has  not  really- 
been  fo  wide,  and  by  no  means  of  fo  much  importance  as  has 
often  been  tliouuht. 

All  acknowledge  that  certain  evidences  of  fand^ificatlon  are  not 
ncccliary  to  give  one  a  right  to  churcli  privileges  ;  and  that  creil- 
ible  grounds  of  hope  are  a  rational  and  fufticient  warrant  for  a 
profellbr  to  come,  and  the  church  to  receive  him.  That  none  arc 
to  be  admitted  but  thofe  for  w  horn  the  church  ought  to  have  char- 
ity. None  may  come  but  thofe  who  can  wiihout  known  hypo- 
crify  profcfs  a  ferious  and  hearty  affent  and  confent  to  the  gofpel. 
AW  iIk*  cfifference  with  refpe«5t  to  xh^  rule  of  aJiniJJionl  X\\\i\)/i\s 
this — i'he  one  fays  none  arc  to  be  admitted  huifuch  as  are  judged 
to  be  true  famts,  making  the  judgynent  of  the  church  the  foundation 
or  condition  of  the  proponant's  right  to  admiffion.  The  other 
maintains,  that  thofe  are  to  be  admitted  who  give  credible  evi- 
dence that  they  are  true  faints  in  a  judgment  of  charity.  So  with 
refpecl  to  the  rule  of  cohfcience^  determining  a  right  Of  accefs.  Tlie 
one  fays  that  none  may  come  but  fuch  2S  judge  themfelves  to  be 
faints  in  heart,  at  jeaft  that  this  is  moff  probable.  The  other 
thinks  that  however  men  may  lufpecf,  and  even  have  a  prevail- 
ing fear  that  their  hearts  are  not  right  ;  yet  if  they  find  this  evi- 
dence of  finceriiy,  that  their  hearts  condemn  them  not  of  hypo- 
crify,  their  warrant  is  t^ood  whether  the  cndit  they  give,  or  the  con^ 
fi^lencc  they  have  in  tlie  rcafons  of  their  hope  be  more  or  lefs. 

Now,  vvhile  1  cannot  but  hold  with  the  latter,  and  thifik  the 
other  opinion  prcffed  with  difficulties  which  1  know  not  huw  to 
remove,  vitwing  the  matttr  in  thecry  cr  Jpeculation^  yet  conliilercd 
in  reference  to  prjiSiice,  the  difference  feems  not  to  be  of  fo  great 
importance.  L[)(;n  the  former  principle  chrirtians  will  indeed 
often  be  obliged  lo  a^^t  with  uncomfortable  doubt  and  uncertain- 
ty wlK'thcr  tliev  ha\e  a  lavsful  right  to  do,  what  yet  they  n"jay  not 
and  dnie  not  ncglci't,  U)  cannot  act  with  the  lately,  freedom,  and 
fecuiiry  of  a  fure  and  dear  conlcience  ;  and  fo  are  in  dai»ger  of 
f  nnlng  even  in  doing  their  duty,  becaufe  they  cannot  do  it  in  taith, 
that  is,  with  a  clear  fat isfacii'  •  and  perfua(ion  of  confcience  tiiat 
it  is  their  duty  nnd  il;jh:.     Hut  if  th^  y  do  not  ftt!  ihejarof  ccn- 

tradis^tion 


The  Right  of  the  Unconverted  to  External  Communion,        1 07 

tradi6lion  when  they  are  told  that  they  may  and  miifl  often  ail 
without  a  certain  right  to  a6t  ;  that  they  may  be  fuisned  they 
mud  to  come  to  ordinances,  before  they  are  fatisfied  of  their  duty 
and  right  to  come  to  them,  though  this  feems  not  the  riglit  way 
of  removing  doubts,  yet  it  is  hoped  that  chriiiians  Vvill  not  be 
kept  back  from  their  duty  by  their  fcruples. 

Indeed  I  cannot  but  think  the  greater  part  at  lead:  of  thofe  who 
hold  that  none  have  a  right  to  the  facraments  but  true  faints, 
differ  little  in  fentiment  from  their  brethren,  who  think  tliat  viii- 
ble  faints  h.ue  a  right  to  them.  For  they  who  conned  this  right 
with  inward  fanc^itication,  yet  conftantly  fuppcfe  it  is  the  evidence 
of  this  alone  which  gives  one  a  ivarrant  to  come,  and  tlie  church 
a  right  to  recpive  him.  So  that  the  right  wliich  grace  is  fuppofed 
to  give  feems  to  be  a  kind  of  dormant  potential  quality,  of  wliich 
no  ufe  can  be  made,  till  it  be  credibly  manifeftcd.  This  fuppof- 
ed right  in  the  light  of  God  is  not  of  itfeif  any  vjarrrrnt^  or  fuffici- 
ent  re£if}n  for  coming  into  church  communion.  And  many  who 
greatly  doubt  whether  they  are  the  fubjecis  of  fimdtifying  grace, 
may  yet  be  bound  in  confcience  to  come,  as  being  fully  perfuad- 
cd  upon  good  grounds  that  it  is  moA  rcafonable  for  them  to  do 
fo.  Such  evidence  of  grace  as  leaves  it  uncertain  whether  a  man 
is  a  true  faint,  and  which  it  is  therefore  fuppofeable,  may  be  found 
in  fome  who  are  not  faints  in  heart,  rnay  it  fee:ns,  by  the  ac- 
knowledgment of  our  brethren,  give  him  a  certain  ivarrcrni  lo  come 
and  the  church  to  receive  him,  in  which  I  fee  not  but  that  ihey 
agree  with  us.  So  tliat  this  7'ight  in  the  fight  of  God^  which  they 
would  conne6l  with  the  truth  of  grace,  feems  to  be  only  a  fpccu- 
lative  notion  of  no  ufe.  //  is  a  right  without  a  warrant.  A  no- 
tion calculated  not  at  all  to  keep  unqualified  perfons  out  of  tlie 
church,  but  only  to  breed  perplexing  fcruples  in  the  confciences 
of  many  who  yet  it  is  acknowledged  ought  not  to  be  kept  back* 
It  lays  many  profefTors  under  a  fa<l  neceirity  either  of  abfenting 
from  the  communion  of  faints,  wlien  they  have  confeflcdly  more 
reafon  to  come,  and  are  bound  in  confcience  and  duty  to  do  fo, 
or  elfe  to  come  with  a  doubting  confcience.  And  which  part  of 
the  alternative  foever  they  take,  they  are  under  a  neccfTity  of 
wounding  their  confcience  ;  from  wliich  they  cannot  efcape,  till 
they  are  fully  perfuaded  in  their  own  mind  that  th.cy  may  law- 
fully do  what  is  to  be  done.  If  thofe  who  find  reafon  to  hope 
they  are  lincere  may  and  ought  to  come  to  the  facraments,  let  us 
not  lay  fnares  for  their  confciences,  by  faying  it  is  doubtful  v;hether 
or  no  they  may  and  ought  to  come  ;  fince  their  right  depends  on 
fomething  of  doubtful  reality.  If  we  have  any  rights  in  the  fight 
of  God  which  is  inevident  to  us,  we  may  rely  on  his  faithful- 
nefs  that  he  will  not  fail  of  fulfilHn^  his  gracious  promife.     But 

to 


loS     7'hc   Right  of  the   Unconverted  to  External  Communion, 

to  make  our  right  and  warrant  to  ufe  ordinances  depend    on  this, 
\^in  leave  us  no  rule  we  can  act  by. 

Tliough  chrif^ians  are  often  in  doubt  as  to  their  fpirirual  ftatc, 
\et  if  they  duly  attend  to  their  rule,  ihc  path  of  duly  is  plaiiily 
defcribed.  They  need  not  flay  till  they  arc  fatisfied  of  their  own 
godly  finccrity,  before  they  can  know  that  it  is  theii  duty  and 
right  to  walk  in  the  commandments  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord. 
While  tlic  confcience  is  doubtful,  we  cannoi  act  with  fafety,  or 
V'ith  a  good  confcience.  But  as  foon  as  we  ere  fatisfied  whr.t  ;r 
is  moQ  reafonable  for  us  to  do,  the  doubt  is  then  refolvo-i. 
confcience  is  fure,  our  right  and  duty  is  plain.  And  we  ;  i 
flicw  ourfelvcs  unfkilful  guides,  if  we  infufe  doubts  and  fcrupics, 
by  telling  men,  that  though  it  is  plainly  mort  renfonable,  anci  th.ey 
nuy  and  mvj}  do  fe,  or  fo,  yet  it  is  uncertain  whether  it  is  lawful  for 
them  to  do  it.  This  inconvenience  and  inconfiflency  we  can 
svoid,  Vv  hile  we  maintain  that  it  is  the  evidence,  and  not  the  real- 
ity of  grace  which  gives  a  lavsful  right  to  gofpel  ordinances. 
Kor  need  any  chriflian,  however  doubtful  of  his  fpiritual  ftate, 
have  his  confcience  infnared  with  doubts  whether  he  has  a  right 
to  do  that  Vvliich  muft  and  ought  to  be  done  by  him.  But  if 
"v^'e  hold  that  none  but  true  faints  have  a  right  or  warrant  to  come 
to  crdinanccs,  I  fee  not  how  we  can  confiftcntly  extricate  doubt- 
ing chrifiians  from  the  perplexity,  jeopardy,  and  neceffity  of  fin- 
ning in  Vvhich  tlu^y  muH:  find  themfc-Ives  entangled  fince  they  can 
neither  aa  nor  forbear  without  prefumption. 

But  when  1  confider  the  rules  ^nd  counfels  given  for  the  dl- 
rcdlicn  and  relief  of  chriftians  under  thcfe  doubts,  and  that  all 
r.gree  in  encouraging  and  urging  an  attendance  on  the  ordinances 
upon  all  who  can  finccrely  confent  to  the  covenant,  fo  far  as  they 
linov;  tlicir.fclves,  I  am  much  confirmed  in  iny  pcrfuafion,  that 
fobcr  and  moderate  men  on  each  fide  of  the  queAion  differ  very 
little  from  eaeh  other  in  their  true  aim,  h.ov.cvcr  they  may  not  be 
alike  clear  and  confillciit  in  their  theories,  or  exatSt  in  tlicir  ex- 
preffions. 

Perhaps  thcic  may  be  fomc  difference  of  opinion  upon  this 
queftion,  Wliether  any  befidcs  true  faints  have  a  title  ly  lovcfumt 
praiit  to  the  crdinanccs  of  tlic  gofpel  ?  It  feems  to  be  agreed, 
that  fomc  whofe  charader  as  true  faints  is  uncertain,  may  have 
fufrieient  realun,  and  therefore  a  warrant  to  coine  to  them,  as 
has  been  obfervcd.  But  it  may  flill  be  th.ought  by  fome  that  true 
faints  only  have  a  pnjjtve  rights  or  covenant  title  to  them. 

As  to  the  inward  virtue  and  fan(^ifying  efficacy  of  ordinances, 
all  will  agree  that  none  have  a  covenant  title  to  this,  but  thofe  who 
wortliily  attend  upon  them.     But  that  the  ordinances  in  the  out^ 

ward 


Of  a  Right  to  a  BIej[jing  with  Ordinances.  109 

warc^  adminiftration  are  granted  hy  the  covenant  to  the  vifible  churchy 
is  a  dodrlne  commonly  and  cxprcfsly  taught  in  the  reformed 
churches,  and  I  find  not  that  it  has  been  exprefsly  denied  by  any* 
Thus,  in  the  Weftminfter  confefllon  of  faith,  "  Unto  this  vilible 
church  (confirming  of  thofe  that  profefs  the  true  reh'gion,  together 
with  their  children)  Chrifl:  hath  given  the  miniftry  oracles  and 
ordinances  of  God."  And  our  divines,  Cotton,  Hooker,  Shep- 
ard,  exprefs  themfelves  very  fully  to  the  fame  purpofe,  alledging 
the  words  of  the  Aportle  in  proof,  averting  that  the  oracles  of 
God  were  committed  to  the  Jews  as  a  covenant  privilege :  Yea, 
what  principle  is  more  generally  taught'  and  profeiTed  by  Psedo- 
baptifts,  than  that  the  children  of  regular  church  members  are 
in  the  covenant,  and  have  a  right  or  title  by  covenant  to  fpecial 
privileges  ?  But  if  any  fuppofe  that  the  ordinances  are  granted  by 
covenant  only  to  true  faints^  and  that  they  only  have  properly  a  cov^ 
enant  title  to  them  ;  yet  while  it  is  granted  that  fome  v;hofe  title 
is  uncertain  may  be  bound  in  reafon  and  confeience,  and  fo  have 
a  zuarrant  to  come  to  them,  a  difference  of  opinion  in  fuch  a  fpec- 
ulative  nicety  may  be  indulged,  without  hard  thoughts  of  each 
other. 


CHAP.     vir. 
Of  a  RIGHT  to  a  BLESSING  with  ORDINANCES. 

S  E  C  T  I  O  N    I. 

r'S^HERE  remains  yet  another  cafe  or  quefllon  relative  to  a 
Jt^  right  to  church  privileges,  which  was  propofed  to  be  con- 
fidered  ;  and  that  if,  who  have  a  covenant  right  to  the  fpiritua! 
benefit  and  fan6iifying  virtue  of  the  ordinances,  in  and  by  their 
attending  to  the  outward  adminirtration  of  them  ?  But  there 
feen-ts  to  be  little  difficulty  or  difference  of  judgment  on  this 
point. 

There  are  fome  who  have  an  acknowledged  right  of  admiffion 
and  accefs  to  ordinances,  who  may  yet  ufe  them  in  fuch  a  manner 
as  to.have  no  covenant  right, or  rcafonable  ground  to  cxpe<^  theac- 
ceptaace  orbkilingof  Chrirt  therein.  They  may  fo  abufc  and  pro- 
fane 


no  Of  d  Right  to  a  BleJJlng  with  Ordinances. 

fane  gofpel  inftitutions  as  to  expofe  thcmfclvcs  to  the  judgments 
of  God.  This  iccms  to  have  been  the  cafe  of  fome  in  the  Co- 
rinthian church,  whofe  intemperance,  uncharitablencfs,  and  dif- 
ordcrly  behaviour,  at  the  table  of  the  Lord,  the  ApoHlc  reproves. 
He  does  not  blame  them  for  coming  without  a  right,  but  tor 
coming  and  behaving  in  an  improper  manner.  This  cafe  then 
fliould  not  be  confounded  with  either  of  the  foregoing,  but  is  to 
be  confidered  by  itfelf,  and  determined  by  rules  and  maxims 
fuited  to  it.  We  cannot  argue  that  becaufe  a  man  ought  not  to 
come  unworthily,  therefore  he  may  not  come,  or  be  admitted  ; 
or  on  the  other  hand,  that  every  one  has  a  prefent  or  immediate 
right  to  the  privileges  of  chrirtian  communion,  provided  he  will 
ufe  the'ii  in  a  right  manner.  P'or  then  neither  the  church,  nor 
the  perfon  coming  to  communion,  could  know  beforehand  wheth- 
er he  had  a  right  to  the  ordinances,  iince  his  right  would  depend 
upon  a  future  unknown  contingency. 

To  the  queftion  then,  who  have  a  right  to  the  fanclifying  vir- 
tue of  ordinar.ces,  and  the  blelling  of  Chrift  from  them,  1  v\ould 
fay  in  brief,  that  tlie  fpiritual  efficacy  of  ordinances  is  by  the 
covenant  annexed  to  n  right  and  worthy  ufe  of  them.  1  (liall  not 
here  enquire  what  is  implied  in  a  worthy  attendance,  which  has 
been  often  and  well  difcourfed  of  by  pra6^ical  writers  ;  but  would 
obferve  in  general,  that  unfan6lified  men  always  fail  in  the  man- 
ner of  their  attendance,  fo  as  that  they  have  no  covenant  title  to 
the  faving  benefit  of  them  :  Ihat  this  may  alio  fometimes  be  the 
cafe  of  true  chrifiians  :  And  that  the  beft  have  always  rcalbn  to 
be  humbled  for  their  imperfe6tions,  and  the  unfuitable  manner 
in  which  they  perform  holy  duties  ;  but  yet  all  who  are  able  to 
ufe  gofpel  ordinances,  with  a  meafure  of  godly  fmcerity,  Hull  re- 
ceive a  bleflmg  therein,  and  be  gracioufly  accepted. 

It  is  the  blefTing  of  Chriil,  and  the  working  of  the  holy  Spirit, 
which  gives  gofpel  ordinances  their  virtue,  efficacy  and  quicken- 
ing energy.  This  blclfrng  pertains  to  the  inward,  invilible  ad- 
miniftration  of  the  covenant,  which  is  wholly  and  immediately 
in  the  hands  of  Chrift.  And  none  are  entitled  to  it  but  thofe 
"who  arc  inwardly  fandified  ;  and  even  thefe  have  not  a  covenant 
right  thereto,  any  further  than  they  are  enabled  rightly  and  worr 
thily  to  ufe  the  ordinances,  which  requires  actual  fupplics  of  grace 
in  time  of  need.  And  though  this  needed  afTillance  is  promilcd 
in  general  to  all  true  faints,  yet  there  is  much  of  fovereignty  ex- 
crcifcd  in  the  adniinifiration  of  it.  Some  receive  it  in  much 
larger  menfures  than  others  ;  and  the  fame  perfons  find  th«  fpirit 
heipin::;  their  infirmities  more  fenfibly,  and  in  a  greater  degree  at 
feme  limes  than  at  others — of  which  we  can  otfcn  give  no  other 
account  thn.n  thi*?,  that  God  worketh  in  us  to  will  and  to  do  ac* 

cording 


Of  a  Right  to  a  Bkjfing  with  Ordinances,  III 

Cording  to  his  good  pleafure.  But  ChriO:  has  not  fo  reftraincd 
himfelf,  but  that  he  often  adds  a  blefTing  to  his  ordinances,  mak- 
ing them  favingly  profitable  to  thofe  who  have  not  come  to  them, 
and  attended  to  the  adminiftration  of  them  in  the  manner  tliey 
ought.  Though  ordinances  do  not  confer  grace  ex  opere  operato^ 
yet  thofe  who  rightfully  attend  upon  them,  may  hope  f"or  a  bleil- 
ing  by  means  of  them,  notwitliftanding  fuch  a^ftual  unfitnefs  as 
bars  them  not  from  lawful  accefs  ;  and  though  the  manner  of 
their  attendance  may  be  fuch  that  they  are  not  entitled  by  prom- 
ife  to  a  blelFmg  :  f'or  Chrift  often  difpcnfes  unpromifed,  as  well 
as  promifed  bleffings  by  means  of  his  ordinances,  which  Ihould 
encourage  thofe  who  lawfully  may,  to  come  to  them,  however 
unfit  they  may  feem  to  attend  upon  them  in  a  due  and  worthy 
manner. 


SECTION    II. 

Of  the  Sin  and  Danger  of  attending  Unworthily, 

IT  may  be  afked  whether  the  fin  and  danger  of  coming  to  and 
attending  holy  ordinances  unworthily,  be  not  greater  than  that 
of  refraining  from  them  ;  and  confequently,  whetijer  they  who 
have  not  reafon  to  think  it  at  leaft  moft  probable  that  they  fliall 
attend  upon  them  worthily,  ought  not  rather  to  be  kept  back 
tiirough  fear  of  aggravating  their  guilt  and  mifery,  than  to  come 
upon  the  prefumption,  that  through  fovereign  unpromifed  grace 
they  may  receive  a  blefiing. 

I  anfwer.  The  greater  fin  and  danger  in  cafes  of  this  kind 
depends  on  circumfiances  which  may  be  infinitely  various  ;  fo 
that  it  may  not  be  poflible  to  lay  down  general  rules  for  deter- 
mining that  fins  of  one  kind  are  greater  than  fins  of  another, 
which  will  hold  v\'ithout  exception.  Nor  is  this  a  matter  of  much 
pradtical  importance  to  us,  fincc  we  are  not  allowed  to  chufe  any 
fin  however  fmall,  to  avoid  the  danger  of  any  fin  however  great. 
We  may  not  ncgleiSi  any  duty  for  fear  we  (hould  perform  it  un- 
worthily, and  thereby  incur  greater  guilt;  but  fhould  fet  about 
the  pradice  of  it.  and  endeavour  to  do  it  in  a  right  manner.  Nor 
may  we  be  negligent  of  the  manner  in  which  we  perform  religi- 
ous duties,  or  allow  ourfelves  in  an  unworthy  manner  of  attend- 
ing to  them,  as  thinking  that  this  is  a  lefs  fm  than  it  would  be 
lo  ncgled  duties  altogether  ;  but  rcfolve  and  ftrive  by  divine  grace 
to  avoid  the  fin  and  danger  on  either  hand.  We  may  not  neg- 
led  the  means  of  religion  for  fear  of  ufing  them  unv^orthily,  aiid 
that  th^n  they  wil!  not  be  blcfifed  to  us,  but  will  operate  to  o«r 

hurt. 


112  Of  a  Right  to  a  Blejfmg  with   Ordinances', 

hurt.  Nor  fhoiyld  we  think  that  a  bare  outward  attendance  wil! 
give  us  rcafon  to  expcfl  a  blelTine,  if  we  indulge  hypocrify,  and 
aim  not  to  approve  ourielves  to  God. 

'I'he  ordinances  cannot  be  Worthily  and  rightly  attended  with- 
out the  excrcifc  of  grace.  And  it  Hiould  be  the  dcurc,  aim,  and 
liopeof  all  when  coming  to  them,  to  ufe  the  means  of  grace  \\\ 
godly  fmccrity,  that  fo  they  may  receive  a  bleirmg.  Their  en- 
couragenient  to  come  fliould  not  be  an  imagination  that  any  can 
rightly  and  acceptably  attend  upon  th.em,  or  have  a  covenant 
right  to  the  fpiritual  benefit  of  tliem  without  true  faith,  and  the 
graces  of  fanflification  ;  but  a  hope,  that  through  tiiC  grace  of 
Chrirt  they  Hiall  be  enabled  to  adt  with  the  fpirit,  the  principles, 
the  aims,  and  lincerity  of  true  chrillians,  and  by  waiting  on  God 
renew  their  ftrength.  But  it  is  not  neceflary  that  we  be  fatisfied 
beforehand,  that  we  fiiall  attend  ordinances  in  a  worthy  and  ac- 
ceptable manner,  and  receive  the  fpiritual  bledlng  thereto  annex- 
ed, in  order  to  our  havinp;  a  clear  warrant,  and  luScient  encour- 
agement to  come  to  them.  Many  true  faints  aie  not  fatisfied  of 
their  own  fincerity  :  And  they  who  have  clear  and  good  evidence 
know  not  what  frames  they  may  be  in,  when  they  addrefs  them- 
felves  to  the  performance  of  religious  duties ;  and  whether  they 
fliall  be  blefied  and  accepted  therein.  We  are  not  of  curfelves 
fufficicnt  to  think  or  do  any  thing  worthily  as  of  ourfelves,  but 
all  our  fufficicncy  is  of  God.  And  will  any  fay  that  they  can 
advance  any  claims  upon  him  to  furnifii  them  v.ith  future  fup- 
plies  of  adual  grace,  which  Ihall  eifeftually  fecure  them  from  the 
power  of  temptation,  and  indwelling  corruption,  and  keep  their 
graces  fo  in  exercife  as  that  they  Ihall  rightly  and  worthily  per- 
form the  duties  before  them.  We  know  that  we  fliali  fail  in  all 
the  duties  of  religion  we  engage  in  ;  and  we  know  not  how  far 
God  may  leave  us  to  mifcarry  therein  :  Yet  this  is  no  reafon 
why  we  fiiould  negleci  duties  ;  which  would  be  running  ourfelves 
immediately  into  fin,  to  fecure  ourfelves  from  the  danger  or  pof- 
iibility  of  perhaps  a  lefs  fin. 

So  if  a  man  finds  reafon  to  fear  that  he  is  rot  a  faint  in  heart, 
and  if  this  is  really  the  cafe,  this  is  no  reafon  why  he  Ihould  neg- 
le«5i:  any  duties  and  means  of  religion  enjoined  upon,  or  appointed 
for  l;im,  !efl  he  Ihould  by  an  undue  manner  of  attendance,  en- 
hance his  fill  and  mifcry.  Vcv  it  is  not  certain,  whatever  his 
prefent  (late  may  be,  but  that  he  may  perform  the  duty  in  fincer- 
it).  He- may  in  the  very  ac^  come  under  the  fant:tif)ing  influ- 
ence of  divine  grace  ;  )  e:i,  tlicre  is  more  reafon  to  hope  for  this, 
while  he  is  fcrioully  waiting  upon  Crod  in  thofe  ordinances  by 
which  he  is  wont  to  draw  and  turn  t!ie  licarts  of  men  to  l-.imfel.^ 
and   make  ihcm  his  v.ililng  people  in  the  day  of  his  power. 

ii 


Of  a  Right  to  a  BleJJtng  ivkh  Ordlnanter*  iij 

if  he  fets  himfelf  to  perform  the  duties,  and  attend  ordinances 
of  religion  enjoined  upon  him,  there  is  a  pofTibility,  yea  reafon 
to  hope,  that  however  unfit  and  uncapable  he  may  feem  at  prefent 
to  do  any  thing  in  a  holy  and  acceptable  manner,  God  may  vifit 
his  foul  with  the  needed  influence  of  his  grace,  and  fo  fupply 
whatever  was  wanting  to  render  his  doings  acceptable.  But  a 
fmful  omifTion  and  negle£l  of  duty  cannot  be  fandlified.  So  that, 
as  was  faid  before,  to  negletfi:  duty  for  fear  of  doing  it  unworthily 
would  be  to  chufe  a  certain  and  perhaps  greater  evil,  rather  an 
uncertain  pofTibility  and  danger  of  that  which,  if  it  fliould  happen, 
may  not  be  fo  bad. 

If  we  defire  and  endeavour  to  do  what  we  are  commanded, 
and  have  a  right  to  do  as  vifible  faints,  that  is,  attend  gofpel  or- 
dinances, and  can  do  it  without  known  hypocrify,  what  reafon 
have  we  to  conclude  that  we  are  not  fincere  ?  And  admitting  that 
we  are  not,  what  reafon  have  we  to  conclude  that  God  may  not 
make  us  fmcere  while  attending  the  common  means  of  grace, 
rather  than  in  negleding  them  ?  And  at  any  rate,  what  reafon 
have  we  to  think  that  it  is  more  finful  and  dangerous  to  attend 
gofpel  ordinances,  which  we  are  bound  and  have  a  lawful  right 
to  do,  though  we  fhould  fail  in  the  manner  of  our  attendance, 
than  it  would  be  to  negle6l  them,  for  fear  that  we  fhould  fail  in 
the  manner,  and  not  ufe  them  worthily  ?  Is  it  the  fafefl  and  mofl 
hopeful  way  to  avoid  enhancing  our  guilt,  and  obtain  the  blefT- 
ings  of  divine  grace,  for  men  to  a6l  contrary  to  the  dictates  of 
their  own  reafon  and  confcience,  and  withdraw  themfelves  from 
the  means  by  which  God  ordinarily  conveys  the  bleffings  of  his 
grace? 

It  will  be  very  generally  allovved,  that  thofe  who  are  favoured 
with  gofpel  ordinances,  which  are  common  inflituted  means  of 
converfion  to  finners,  as  well  as  of  edifying  faints,  may  and  ought 
to  come  to  them,  whether  they  are  converted  or  unconverted  ; 
and  that  the  blelfing  of  Chrid:  may  be  hoped  for  to  accompany 
the  difpenfation  of  the  word,  and  prayer  for  faving  good  to  fuch 
as  may  not  attend  on  thefe  ordinances  in  a  holy  manner.  They 
who  would  reftrain  a  right  to  facraments  only  to  true  faints,  have 
yet  ftrongly  and  conftantly  maintained  that  it  is  lawful,  and  the 
duty  of  the  unconverted  to  attend  the  means  of  converfion.* 

But 

*  "  Socrates  might  pray  to  Goct,  and  he  attended  his  duty  when  he  did 
lo,  although  he  knew  not  the  revelation  which  God  had  made  ot  iiimfelf 
in  his  word.  Seneca,  though  he  did  not  embrace  the  f'ofpel,  wliicli  at  that 
day  was  preached  in  the  world,  yet  he  might  pray  to  that  lupreme  Bein*;, 
whom  he  acknowledged.     And  if  his  brotlier  Galio  at   Corinth,  when 

'      Paul 
P 


114  Of  a  Right  to  a  Blejftng  with  Ordinances. 

But  it  has  been  thought  that  the  fin  and  danger  of  coming  to 
tlie  Lord's  fupper  uav,-orthi!y,  as  the  unconverted  do,  if  they 
come  at  all,  is  much  greater  than  that  of  coming  while  uncon- 
verted to  other  ordinances,  wliich  are  the  inftitutcd  means  of 
convcriion  :  That  it  is  ahlblutelv  unlawful  to  come  at  all,  unlefs 
they  eat  and  drink  worthily  :  'I 'hat  this  not  being  a  converting 
ordinance,  nor  dcllgned  for  ihe  ufe  of  any  unconverted,  there  is 
no  reafjn  to  hope  fuch  will  receive  any  fpiritual  benefit  from  it  j 
but  wc  have  reafon  to  expect  that  they  will  eat  and  drink  judg- 
ment to  themfelves.  Since  then  no  good  is  to  be  hoped  for,  and 
great  evil  and  danger  to  be  expelled  from  an  unconverted  man's 
iifing  this  ordinance,  there  is  need  of  peculiar  caution  ;  and  it 
jnuii  be  defperate  rafhncfs  and  prefumption  for  any  to  venture, 
unlefs  they  are  well  fatisfied  that  they  are  true  faints,  and  fhall 
approach  and  partake  worthily  at  the  table  of  the  Lord. 

It  is  to  be  obferved,  that  this  objection  fuppofes  or  admits  all 
that  has  hitherto  been  argued  and  pleaded  for,  viz.  that  the  un- 
converted may  be  regular  church  members,  vifible  faints  have  a 
right  of  admilTion,  be  bound  in  confcience  and  reafon  to  come, 
that  they  may  have  a  right  to  ordinances  by  a  covenant  grant,  &c. 
Thefe  things  having  been  before  difcuffed,  are  now  taken  for 
granted  ;  and  the  queliion  before  us  comes  to  this,  whether,  if 

all 

Paul  preached  there,  had  prayed  to  this  fiipreme  Being  to  guide  him  into 
the  truth,  that  he  might  know  whether  the  dodrine  Paul  preached  was 
true,  he  there! r.  would  have  adled  very  becoming  a  reafonable  creature, 
and  any  one  would  have  adted  unrcafon..bly  in  forbidding  him.  But  yet 
fureiy  neiiherof  thcfe  men  was  qualified  for  the  chriitian  Tacraments.  So 
that  it  is  apparent  there  is  atid  ought  to  be  adiltin»^tion  made  between  du- 
ties ct  wrrfliip,  vvith  rclpect  to  qualifications  for  them.  Any  natural  man 
may  as  well  exp^c(^  his  defircs  to  God,  as  hear  when  God  declarci;  his 
will  to  him.  '  lis  true  when  an  unconverted  man  prays,  the  manner  of 
hii  cl(jing  It  is  finful.'* 

Edivarth'  Hunhh'  Enquiry^  ^-  Ii4»  H5' 

*'  They  who  have  no  interefl  in  the  covenant  of  grace,  and  are  in  no 
rcfpert  God's  covenant  people,  may  lavs  fully  hear  the  word  and  (Jiay." 

Idem.    Jrfwi-r  to  frU/iiifrts,  p.  107. 

**  U  a  man  at  his  own  coft  fels  up  a  Ichooi  in  order  to  tcacii  ignorant 
children  to  read,  and  ai  ci.»j(!ingly  ignorant  children  fliould  ^o  tlutlur  in 
order  to  learn  to  read,  would  he  co:r.c  into  the  Ichool  and  fay  in  anger  to  an 
i-norant  chiUi  that  he  tc;und  there,  Hoxv  camclt  ihtni  in  hither  before  thou 
h '.  ift  learnt  to  rcatl  ?  Did  the  ApoHIe  Paul  ever  rebuke  the  Heathen,  uho 
came  to  hear  hnn  pi  each  the  golpel,  faying.  How  came  you  hither  to  hear 
jiic  preach,  nor  having  grace?  '1  his  woiiUl  liave  been  unrealonable ;  bc- 
caulf  preaching  is  an  OKJinance  appointed  to  that  end  that  men  might  ob- 
tain grarc.  Can  wc  fuppofe  that  Chrilt  will  fay  to  men  In  indignation  at 
the  day  of  JudjJMient,  How  cmie  you  to  prcfumc  to  \\(c  ihe  means  1  ap- 
puintvd  lui-  \tui  (.onvcrlion  Lefwie  you  were  co'iverfed  ?" 

Ut,'/t.  A'iJ\vc\  to  HlUiamSj  p,  133. 


Of  a  'Right  to  a  BkJJing  luitb  Ordinances,  115 

all  that  has  hitherto  been  argued  for  be  admitted,  yet  the  great 
fin,  guilt,  and  danger  which  an  unconverted  perfon  incurs  by 
coming  unworthily  to  the  Lord's  fupper,  when  it  is  confidered 
that  no  benefit  can  be  reafonably  hoped  for  by  fuch  a  one  which 
might  compenfate  and  counterbalance  tliis  hazzard  ;  whether 
this  would  not  make  it  unwarrantable  rafhnefs  for  fuch  as  are 
not  well  perfuaded  of  their  own  fincerity  to  come  to  this  ordi- 
nance ? 

To  the  feveral  particulars  here  alledged  I  would  reply  :  In  the 
firjl  place^  it  is  granted  that  the  unconverted  cannot,  while  fuch, 
come  to  and  partake  of  the  Lord's  fupper  in  a  holy  manner^  and 
that,  in  this  fenfe,  fuch  come'unworthily,  and  have  no  covenant 
right  to  a  blelhng  ;  ihat  the  linful  manner  of  their  approach  rend- 
ers  them  obnoxious,  as  all  fin  does,  to  Gcd's  diTpleafure.  But 
this  proves  not  that  it  is  more  unlawful  for  them  to  come  to  the 
Lord's  table,  than  to  hear  or  read  the  word,  to  pray,  to  eat  their 
own  bread,  or  voluntarily  forbear  to  do  any  of  thefe  things.  And 
yet  it  is  acknowledged  that  finners  may  pray,  and  attend  the 
means  of  Infirudlion  and  converfion  ;  atid  that  herein  they  "  at- 
tend to  their  duty,  and  act  very  becoming  a  reafonable  creature." 
nat  they  are  not  to  be  blamed  or  chareed  with  prefumpiion  for 
"  ufing  the  means  of  converfion  before  they  are  converted  ;  tho' 
they  do  none  of  thefe  things  in  a  holy  manner,  but  do  ^every 
thing  unworthily  in  this  fenfe  :  So  that  the  reafon  feems  to  be  at 
leaft  as  ftrong  againf!:  negledting  ordinances  unworthily,  as  com- 
ing to  them  unworthily  :  It  is  of  no  more  weight  on  one  fide 
than  on  the  other,  and  therefore  proves  nothing. 

Secondly.  The  fault  which  the  Apoftle  reproves  in  the  Co- 
rinthians, and  terms  eating  and  drinking  unworthily,  appears 
not  to  have  been  coming  to  the  ordinance  while  unconverted. 
But  it  was  their  diforderly  carriage  at  the  Lord's  table,  which 
feems  to  have  been  very  grofs  and  fcandalous,  and  fuch  as  few 
ferious  and  confcientious  profefibrs,  after  having  had  the  advan- 
tage of  being  duly  inftruiled  in  the  nature  and  defign  of  the  or- 
dinance, v»^ould  be  likely  to  fall  into.  And  yet  the  Apofile  does 
not  fugged:  to  them  that  he  judged  them  to  be  unconverted.  Nor 
need  we  judge  thus  of  them,  though  probably  fome  of  them 
might  not  be  finccre.  We  have  reafon,  however,  to  think  that 
many  who  are  not  faints  in  heart,  are  not  guilty  of  the  diforderly 
behaviour  at  the  Lord's  tabic,  heie  reproved  as  unworthy  eatiwg 
and  drinking,  not  difcerning  the  Lord's  body.  That  is,  as  ex- 
pofitors  generally  underfiand  the  words,  not  difiinguifhing  from 
a  common  meal  this  religious  feafi  commemorative  of,  and  re- 
prefenting  the  Lord's  body.  And  though  the  unconverted  are 
unworthy  communicants,  in  the  fer?'e  lately  mci  tloned,  yet  if  they 

attend 


n6  Of  a  Right  to  a  BUJftng  with  Ordinances. 

attend  the  ordinance  in  a  fcrioiis  and  religious  remembrance  of 
Chrifi:,  thus  making  difference  between  it  and  tlieir  common 
food^  they  Teem  not  to  be  chargeable  with  the  fin  of  eating  and 
drinking  unworthily  in  the  fcnfe  more  directly  intended  by  the 
Apol^le  in  this  place.     But, 

Thirdly.  VVhether  the  fin  of  coming  to  the  Lord's  fupper 
unworthily  be  greater  and  more  dangerous,  than  to  pray,  or  hear, 
cr  read  the  word  unworthily  cannot,  1  conceive,  be  determined 
in  general  without  taking  into  confideraticn  the  circumflanccsby 
^vhich  the  one  or  the  other  may  be  aggravated,  or  alleviated. 
Some  may  profane  divine  ordinances  in  fuch  a  manner  by  an  un- 
worthy attendance  on  them,  that  it  would  have  been  a  lefs  fin, 
if  they  had  not  come  to  them.  In  others,  a  neglect  of  them  may 
be  more  finful  and  dangerous  than  an  undue  manner  of  attend- 
ance. The  views,  tempers,  and  manner  with  which  icy^  e  pray, 
or  hear  the  word,  may  be  more  difpleafing  to  God,  anc  ^  -nger- 
ous  to  their  own  fouli,  than  the  views,  aims,  and  manrv:r  of 
fome  when  they  come  unworthily  to  the  Lord's  tnbie.  We  can- 
not conclude,  if  a  mari  has  partaken  unworth.ly,  that  his  fin 
"would  have  been  lefs  if  he  had  withdrawn.  Perhap.  turning  his 
back  upon  the  ordinance,  which  it  was  his  right  and  duty  to  at- 
tend, might  have  been  a  yet  greater  fin.  Thougl  the  Apollle 
blames  the  Corinthians  for  eating  and  drinking  unworthily,  )et 
he  docs  not  fay  it  would  have  been  lefs  finful,  if  they  had  negled- 
cd  to  come  to  the  ordinance. 

Fourthly,  Suppofe  it  be  a  greater  and  more  dangerous  fin  to 
partake  unworthily  at  the  Lord's  fupper,  than  not  to  come  to  it, 
this  IS  no  fufficient  reafon  for  any  one  to  abfent  himfelf, 
if  it  be  his  right  and  duty  to  come.  It  ought  indeed  to  make 
him  folicitous  to  come  in  a  right  manner,  to  labour  to  be  actually 
prepared,  to  keep  his  heart  with  all  diligence,  looking  earneQly 
to  God  for  the  aids  of  his  grace,  that  his  fpirit  may  help  his  in- 
firmity, and  carry  him  through  the  folemn  duty  before  him,  and 
keep  him  from  profaning  the  holy  ordinance,  and  fo  bringing 
guilt  and  danger  upon  himfelf.  But  for  any  one  to  decline  doing 
his  duty,  and  ufing  his  privilege,  thinking  that  this  would  be  lefs 
finful  and  dangerous  than  it  would  be  to  fail  in  the  manner  of 
attending  to  it,  would  be,  as  was  faid,  to  do  what  is  in  itfelf  fin- 
ful, in  order  to  prevent  a  future  fin,  wliich  we  fear  will  be  more 
dangerous ;  which  is  what  no  one  is  allowed  to  do.  Be  the  danger 
ever  fo  great  in  our  apprehenfion,  wc  may  not  think  to  avoid  it 
by  doing  any  thing  which  is  forbidden,  or  declining  to  do  any 
thing  which  is  enjoined  upon  us.  Wc  may  not  cluife  a  prefcnt 
^n,  to  preclude  a  f'.iturc  danger.     And  fincc  it  is  certainly  finful 

for 


Of  a  Right  to  a  Bhffmg  with  Ordinances,  I17 

for  regular  church  members  allowedly  to  negle£l  coming  to  the 
Lord's  fupper,  they  may  not  do  fo  whatever  their  inward  ftate 
may  be.  This  rule,  I  conceive,  will  ftand  upon  firm  grounds, 
though  it  were  fupppofed  that  there  were  no  reafon  to  hope  that 
attending  to  the  Lord's  fupper  would  be  of  any  fpiritual  benefit 
to  an  unconverted  church  member,  but  would  rather  increafe  his 
guilt  and  danger.     We  may  not  do  evil  to  prevent  evil. 


SECTION    IIL 

Whether  the  Lord's  Supper  be  a  Converting  Ordinance, 

AS  the  fuppofitlon,  that  there  is  no  reafon  to  hope  that  the 
Lord's  fupper  will  be  of  any  fpiritu-'^  benefit  to  an  unconverted 
communicant  is  grounded  upon  rnis  principle,  that  this  ordi- 
nance is  not  an  inftituted  means  of  converfion  ;  it  may  not  be 
amifs  to  examine  this  point  a  little  further.  For  though  we  may 
fee  that  it  is  not  of  much  practical  importance,  yet  as  it  has  been 
a  fubje6l  of  debate  among  chriftians,  1  fliall  take  liberty,  before  I 
withdraw  my  hand  from  the  table,  tofliew  my  opinion. 

It  is  not  denied  but  that  receiving  the  Lord's  fupper  may  be 
the  occalion  of  their  converfion  v;ho  have  unwarrantably  come 
and  partaken  of  it.  God  fometimes  makes  the  wickednefs  of 
men,  the  occafion  of  good  to  them.  But  none  will  fay  that  the 
Lord's  fupper  is  properly  an  inftituted  mean  of  fpiritual  good  to 
thofe  v;ho  are  not  allowed  to  come  to  it.  It  is  not  pretended  by 
any,  that  this  is  a  converting  ordinance  to  any  while  out  of  the 
vifible  church.  None  rfiay  lawfully  partake  but  rightful  church 
members.  Now  that  fome  rightful  members  may  be  unconvert- 
ed, and  being  in  and  under  the  covenant  as  externally  admi- 
niftered,  may  have  a  covenant  right  to  the  outward  ordinances, 
and  be  bound  in  duty,  and  have  a  good  warrant  to  come  to  the 
Lord's  fupper,  having  been  before  argued  at  large,  is  here  fuppol- 
ed  :  and  the  queftion  is,  whether  the  Lord's  fupper  bean  infiitut- 
cd  means  of  converfion  to  fuch  rightful  communicants  as  are 
unconverted  ? 

According  to  this  way  of  flating  the  queflion,  it  appears  that 
all  arguments  for  the  negative  from  the  unlawfulnefs  of  an  un- 
fan^tified  man's  coming  to  the  facraments  are  precluded,  as  hav- 
ing been  already  confuiered  and  anfwcred.  All  agree  that  the 
Lord's  fupper  is  not  a  converting  ordinance  to  thofe  who  have  no 
right  and  warrant  to  come  to  it.  So  that  the  point  of  enquiry  is, 
■whether,  if  we  admit  the  right  and  duty  of  fome  unfan£tified  mea 
to  come  to  the  facrament,  we  have  reafon  to  think  it  may  be  an 
inftituted  mean  of  their  converfion  ?  Now, 


1x8  Of  a  Right  to  a  Blejpng  with    Ordinances', 

Now,  I  muft  confefs  that  I  am  not  able  to  prove  from  the 
fcriptures  that  the  Lord's  Tapper  is  a  converting  ordinance  to  the 
unconverted.  I  find  not  that  this  is  aflerted  in  the  New  Tefta- 
ment  ;  or  that  it  can  be  certainly  inferred  from  any  of  the  doc- 
trines or  fads  there  recorded.  Neither  do  I  find  that  the  con- 
trary is  proveable  by  fcripture  :  So  that  we  feem  not  to  liave 
fufficient  evidence  certainly  to  determine  the  problem  one  way  or 
the  other.  And  what  fome  have  argued  from  experience,  and 
from  inflances  of  perfons  who  have  been  firft  favingly  converted 
by  means  of  their  partaking  of  this  ordinance  feems  not  very  con- 
clufive.  For  I  think  the  truth  of  the  fad  can  fcarce  be  made 
certain.  And  admitting  the  fad,  that  fome  may  have  been  con- 
verted while  attending  on  this  ordinance,  this  will  fcarce  make  it 
certain,  that  their  receiving  the  facrament  was  the  means  of  this 
happy  change.  For  we  cannot  conclude  that  all  the  concomi- 
tant circumllances  or  occafions  of  any  event  have  any  proper 
efficiency  as  caufes  or  means  of  producing  it. 

But  en  the  other  hand  there  are  feveral  confiderations,  which 
if  they  do  not  amount  to  a  certain  proof,  yet  feem  to  make  it  very 
credible,  that  the  Lord's  fupper  may  be  a  converting  ordinance  to 
fuch  regular  and  rightful  communicants  as  are  unconverted. 
For  as  fuch  communicants  need  converting  grace,  I  fee  not  why 
we  may  not  conceive  that  this  ordinance  may  be  defigned  to  be  a 
means  of  fpiritual  good  to  them  as  well  as  others.  It  fecms  ra- 
tional to  think  that  all  gofpel  ordinances  are  inf^ituted  means  of 
good  to  all  charaders  of  men  who  are  proper  and  rightful  fubjcds 
of  them,  and  who  need  and  are  capable  of  receiving  fpiritual  bene- 
fit from  them.  And  if  wc  confider  this  ordinance  in  its  own  na- 
ture, I  fee  not  but  that  it  may  be  well  adapted  to  fubfcrve  the  firft 
converfion  of  finners,  and  promote  penetential  forrow  for  fin  in 
them,  and  caufc  them  to  mourn  for  it,  while  looking  on  him 
whom  they  have  pierced,  and  by  faith  behold  the  Lamb  of  God, 
who  takcth  away  the  lin  of  the  world,  and  who  is  evidently  fct  forth 
as  crucified  before  them.  Why  does  it  not  appear  to  be  as  well  fit- 
ted to  be  a  means  of  their  converfion,  as  other  inftitutions  which 
are  acknowledged  to  be  converting  ordinances  ?  Befides,  I  think 
none  will  doubt  but  that  the  Lord's  fupper  may  be,  and  often  is 
a  converting  ordinance  to  declining  faints  ;  the  mean  of  healing 
their  backllidings,  of  reviving  and  advancing  the  work  of  repent- 
ance and  converfion  in  them.  Converfion  is  a  gradual  work. 
It  is  going  on,  and  renevsed  day  by  day  ;  though  it  is  in  an  in- 
flant  that  we  begin  to  be  finccre.  And  it  is  allowed  that  the  after 
cxercVes  of  repentance  and  turning  to  (jod  are  of  the  fame  kind 
for  fubftancc  in  chriAians  \\ith  v. hat  they  experience  at  their  firft 

converfion. 


Of  a  Right  to  a  Blefftng  with  Ordinances,  119 

converfion.  Now  if  the  Lord's  fupper  be  a  fit  means  of  effecting 
and  prorTioting  the  work  of  converfion  in  faints,  why  may  it  not 
be  a  fit  means  of  efFe£^ing  a  work  of  the  fame  kind  in  the  uncon- 
verted ?  Or  can  any  good  reafon  be  given,  why  thefe  (hould  be 
thought  lefs  capable  or  fit  to  be  led  to  repentance  by  this  than  by 
other  means  ? 

Upon  the  whole,  though  I  pretend  not  pofitively  to  determine 
any  thing  without  more  clear  fcriptural  evidence,  yet  I  fee  not  but 
that  the  Lord's  fupper  may  be,  by  the  blefling  of  God,  the  means 
of  converfion  to  fuch  rightful  communicants  as  need  converting 
grace  :  And  that  we  may  hope  they  will  receive  fpirtual  benefit 
from  it.  And  however,  that  there  appears  no  harm  or  danger  in 
this  opinion. 


SECTION      IV. 

Ohje^ions  Confukred, 

BUT  it  is  obje£led,  If  the  Lord's  fupper  be  a  converting  ord- 
inance, what  good  reafon  can  be  given  why  none  fhould  come  or 
be  admitted  to  it,  but  fuch  as  there  is  reafon  to  think  are  convert- 
ed already  ?  If  a  hofpital  were  provided  and  furnifiied  for  nourifh- 
ing  the  healthy,  and  healing  the  fick,  would  it  not  be  unaccount- 
able and  unreafonable,  if  the  officers  were  ordered  not  to  admit 
any  but  fuch  as  they  had  reafon  to  think  were  well  ? 

Jnjwer,  If  there  be  any  weight  in  this  objecflion  it  will  prove 
that  no  ordinances  are  appointed  as  means  of  converfion  to  vifi- 
ble  faints,  and  members  of  inftituted  churches  ;  fince  none  are  to 
be  admitted,  or  to  come  into  church  communion,  but  fuch  as 
the  church  has  reafon  to  have  charity  for.  And  is  it  then 
thought  abfurd  and  unreafonable,  that  means  of  converfion 
fhould  be  provided  and  defigned  for  t!ie  benefit  of  thofe,  of  whom 
there  is  reafcn  to  hope  that  they  are  converted  ?  Will  any  fay  that 
no  means  of  converfion  are  provided  or  inftituted  for  church  mem- 
bers, or  that  they  have  lefs  reafon  than  others  to  hope  to  be  ben- 
efited by  them  ?  This  would  be  a  new  dodrine  indeed,  never  be- 
fore heard  in  the  church,  which  has  always  believed  ^vA  tauc^ht 
that  all  gofpel  ordinances  are  granted  by  covenant  to  the  viiible 
church  :  "That  church  members  enjoy  many  privileges  which 
others  enjoy  not,  and  if  not  regenerated,  are  in  a  more  likely  way 
to  obtain  regenerating  grace,  and  all  the  fpiritual  blefilngs  both 
of  the_covenant  and  fcai."     [Cambridge  platform,  Chap.  12. 1 


lio  Of  a  Right  t9  a  BhJJing  with  Ordinance^ 

Mr.  Shepard  fpokc  the  fcnfe  of  the  New- England  churches  m 
tlic  following  memorable  words  :  "  Others  Iicar  the  word,  but 
thofe  in  outward  covenant  enjoy  it  by  covenant  and  promife  : 
And  hence  thcfe  in  the  hrft  place  and  principally  arc  fought  after  by 
thefe  means.  And  therefore  Chrift  forbids  hisdifciples  at  lirll  to 
go  preach  in  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  (perfons  out  of  covenant) 
but  to  the  loll  llieep  of  the  houfe  of  ifrael.  And  though  he  bids 
hisdifciples  go  preach  to  all  nations,  yet  it  is  faid,  Acls  iii.  26, 
"  Unto  you////  hath  he  fcnt  Chrili,  becaufe  you  are  the  children 
of  the  promife  and  covenant.  Repent  therefore  and  be  convert- 
ed. Do  not  refill  or  refufe  Chrift  :  For  he  [God J  hath  firft  fent 
Chrift  to  you,  to  blefs  you,  and  turn  you  from  your  iniquities. 
And  hence  it  is  that  tliough  the  word  may  come  to  heathens,  as 
well  as  church  members,  yet  it  comes  not  to  them  by  way  of 
covenant,  as  it  doth  to  church  members  ;  nor  have  they  any 
promife  of  mercy  aforchand,  as  church  members  have  ;  nor  is 
it  chiefly  belonging  to  fuch,  but  unto  the  children  of  the  cove- 
nant.*" And  not  only  are  gofpel  ordinances  in  a  peculiar  man- 
ner the  privileges  of  vifible  churches  and  faints,  as  well  convert- 
ing ordinances,  as  thofe  which  are  for  edification  j  but  there  are 
alfo  promifcs  of  converting  grace  made  to  them. 

It  was  to  church  members  that  thefe  promifes  were  made, 
*'  The  Lord  thy  God  will  circumcife  thy  heart,  and  the  heart 
of  thy  feed  to  love  and  fear  the  Lord.  And  a  new  heart  will  I 
give  you,  and  a  new  fpirit  will  I  put  within  you,"  &c,  with  many 
others  which  need  not  be  repeated.  And  accordingly  we  find 
the  church  praying  for  converting  grace,  and  thus  pleading  : 
'*  Turn  thou  me,  and  I  fhall  be  turned,  for  thou  art  the  Lord 
my  God  ;"  taking  encouragement  from  their  covenant  relation  to 
Ciod,  of  which  they  were  well  affured,  as  being  his  vifible  people, 
however  they  might  doubt  whether  their  hearts  were  truly  turn- 
ed to  him. 

Belides,  not  only  the  more  common  ordinances  and  means  of 
convcrfion  are  appointed  efpecially,  and  chiefly,  though  not  ex- 
clufivcly,  for  the  benefit  of  church  members,  as  they  may  need 
them,  but  there  are  fome  ordinances  appointed  peculiarly  fortl^.c 
humiliation  and  converfiun  of  fuch  j  J  mean  the  ordinances  of 
church  dilcipline,  admonition,  fulpenfion,  excommunication. 
Thofe  are  defunicd  as  means  to  bring  ofienders  to  repentance  ; 
and  none  but  church  members  are  to  liave  thefe  means  ufed  with 
them.  So  that  it  is  not  abfurd  or  unreafonable  that  means  of 
convcrfion  be  provided,  in  cafe  of  need,  fur  ih.ofe  who  when  ad- 
mitted aie  not  known  to  need  them. 

Can 

•  On  ihc  church  memberfhip  of  Children,  p.  3—4- 


Of  a  Right  to  a  Blejfmg  with  Ordimncei:  lit 

Can  any  good  reafon  be  given  why  means  of  converfion  may 
tiot  be  appointed  for  orderly  church  members,  who  may  need 
converting  grace  ?  Or  why  the  word  and  facrament  may  not  be 
defigned  as  means  for  this  end,  as  well  as  that  cenfures  fliould 
be  appointed  for  diforderly  members,  to  humble  them  and  bring 
them  to  repentance  ?  Or  muft  orderly  members  alone  have  na 
means  of  converfion  provided  for  them  ? 

Though  none  may  come,  or  be  admitted  to  the  communioti 
of  the  church,  who  are  known  to  be  unconverted,  none  but  fucll 
as  have  and  hold  forth  credible  evidence  of  fandification  5  yet 
fome  who  according  to  the  gofpel  rule  have  a  warrant  to  come^ 
and  a  right  to  be  admitted,  may  not  be  true  faints,  and  fo  may 
need  converting  grace  as  much  as  any.  It  is  therefore,  I  thinkj 
fo  far  from  being  abfurd  and  unreafortable  to  fuppofc  that  the 
ordinances  of  the  church  may  be  defigned  and  adapted  to  convey 
converting  grace  \.o  thofe  who  need  it,  that  this  feems  more  td 
difplay  the  wifdom  and  goodnefs  of  Chrift,  that  he  has  provided 
means  for  conveying  the  bleffings  of  his  grace  to  his  covenant 
people  according  to  their  feveral  needs,  and  makes  the  fam^ 
means  efFeilual  to  different  ends. 

If  a  hofpital  were  ere(3ed,  into  which  none  were  to  be  receiv- 
ed but  thofe  who  appear  to  be  in  health,  yet  fmce  men  havd 
fometimes  dangerous  diforders  upon  them  which  are  not  known^ 
it  would  be  wife  and  kind  to  have  provifion  made  for  the  cure  of 
fuch  maladies,  as  well  as  for  the  maintenance  oi  thofe  who  are 
well ;  and  that,  fo  far  as  might  be,  fuch  a  regimen  be  prefcribed  as 
might  fuit  both  thofe  intentions. 

It  is  further  obje^ed.  If  the  Lord's  fupper  be  a  converting 
Gfrdfriance,  then  it  is  io  either  to  thofe  Only  who  think  themfelves 
godly  when  they  are  not  foj  or  for  fuch  alfo  as  are  fenfible  that 
they  are  ungodly.  But  it  is  not  appointed  a  converting  ordinance: 
to  either.  Not  to  the  former,  becaufe  they  who  think  themfelves 
converted  cannot  ufe  it  as  a  means  of  converfion.  Nor  to  theJ 
latter  ;  for  it  would  be  abfurd  to  fuppofe  that  men  fliould  be  re- 
quired to  make  a  lying  profelTion  of  piety  as  the  means  of  theii' 
becoming  real  faints.     To  this  I  anfwer — ■ 

X.  That  the  disjun£lion  is  to  be  denied.  There  are  many 
"^who  neither  think  themfelves  to  be  godly  when  they  are  not,  nor 
are  fenfible  that  they  are  ungodly,  but  are  in  doubt  refpe(fling;. 
their  fpiritual  ftate.  Perhaps  this  may  be  tlie  cafe  with  a  great 
part  of  regular  church  members. 

The  Lord's  fupper  may  be  a  converting  ordinance  to  fuch  of 
thefe  as  are  unconverted,  notwithftandino;  what  is  here  objected, 
"Vfhich  4oss  not  concern  then?.. 


J 


